Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
When classmates or colleagues communicate about a project in person instead of by e-mail, they will produce better work for the project.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
Considering advancements in technologies, it is evident that the manner of communication among people is changing. One of the most commonplace used manners of communicating, especially in formal cases, is sending an e-mail. But is it always beneficial? The question of whether classmates or colleagues should communicate about a project using an e-mail rather than in person has become a topic of controversy. On the one hand, some people believe that it is not always practical and prosperous. Their assumption is engaged in a dispute with beliefs of some others affiliating to another group, substantiating the view that people should use e-mail instead of talking in person. They believe that when people can send an e-mail from their office or even at home, setting a meeting to talk about the project in person is a waste of time. As far as I am concerned, I am more inclined to the first point of view, not only because talking in person will reduce to possibility of misconception, but also because people can be more innovative when they communicate with others in person. My rationals for this point of view is elaborated and exemplified in the following paragraphs.
The first and most important thing to mention is that chatting and sending e-mail is always associated with misconception. While people can get the other side of communication's form of talking, they can not completely understand it in writings such as e-mail or short text messages. Hence when people send e-mail, the possibility of misconception rises. Research conducted at the psychology department of Tehran university demonstrated that most people understand both content and form when they speak with others in person. I personally misunderstand my friends' attitude against different things almost every time I chat with them.
Another point I would like to make is that people are more innovative when they are communicating and speaking with others. Although people can share their progress and ideas with each other using e-mail, they can not completely work together. Whenever people communicate with each other in person, they can immediately correct their teammate or even can come up with more efficient ideas than the one their teammates propose. I personally try my best to use my teammate knowledge and experience whenever I have to come up with new ideas, and if I used e-mail to communicate them, I would face many obstacles like waiting for my teammate to answer me. A research conducted on about fifty students illustrated that they are more innovative and come up with much more efficient ideas when they communicate in person.
All in all, I believe that emerging of e-mail technology has benefited people in many cases and it is so useful to the people who seek to find a manner of saving time, but this does not mean that it is the best way of communication in all the conditions. Last but not least, I highly recommend people to consider the conditions before using a specific technology. Although technologies often help people with their tasks, sometimes using them have dire consequences.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 254, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: Whether; The question whether
...an e-mail. But is it always beneficial? The question of whether classmates or colleagues should communi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 284, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
... such as e-mail or short text messages. Hence when people send e-mail, the possibilit...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, so, while, such as, in many cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 9.8082437276 133% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 13.8261648746 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.0286738351 154% => OK
Pronoun: 53.0 43.0788530466 123% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 77.0 52.1666666667 148% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2598.0 1977.66487455 131% => OK
No of words: 511.0 407.700716846 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08414872798 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75450408675 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94827453204 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 212.727598566 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.465753424658 0.524837075471 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 827.1 618.680645161 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 9.59856630824 135% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.94265232975 40% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.642432729 48.9658058833 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.090909091 100.406767564 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2272727273 20.6045352989 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.81818181818 5.45110844103 52% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.88709677419 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.225954956966 0.236089414692 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0732448367186 0.076458572812 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0510543170292 0.0737576698707 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.137398222355 0.150856017488 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0635741101814 0.0645574589148 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 11.7677419355 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 58.1214874552 83% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.48 10.9000537634 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.08 8.01818996416 101% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 86.8835125448 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.002688172 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.