Imagine that you are considering taking action to improve your performance in order to get better grades (marks) school or to get a promotion and higher pay at work. You are considering the following two actions. --Doing additional work or extra assignments beyond what is required --Participating more actively and contributing your own ideas more frequently in group discussions Which ONE of these two actions do you think would be MORE helpful for improving your performance? Why? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. Be sure to use your own words. Do not use memorized examples.
Some people think that in order to improve performance, one must do additional work or extra assignments beyond what is required. Others claim that participating more actively and contributing more ideas in a group is a better option. For me, I believe that actively participating in group discussion can greatly enhance productivity. My reasons are as follows.
To begin with, for students to ace their study performance, they must increase their learning efficiency. Conspicuously, actively discussing things in the group can help students boost their learning efficiency. For example, I once took a course called Introduction to Computer Security, and my professor required me and my teammates to penetrate a relatively secure. The leader of the group required us to discuss our attacking strategies every weekend. Whenever someone had a brilliant idea about how to exploit the server, the leader would require us to write scripts and test it immediately. Eventually, we successfully attacked and gained full access to the server in less than five days. On the other hand, my sister tried to improve her programming skills by self-assigning difficult, unfathomable algorithms problems on Codeforce, which is a competitive programming website. Yet, problems in that website were so difficult that she often needed to spend five days solving a single problem. As a result, her programming skill did not improve significantly.
Last but not least, employees must acquire new knowledge to enhance their performance, and actively discussing things in a group can help workers gain more new knowledge. Take me as an example. I currently worked in a technology company called TIC, and he was one of the members of Machine Learning Design Team in TIC. My boss required all members in my team to discuss state-of-the-art deep learning models every Thursday. What’s more, my supervisors constantly asked me to submit fascinating ideas about feature engineering after reading newly-published papers. Eventually, I could learn a great amount of machine learning models techniques and ideas every month. On the contrary, my sister also worked as a machine learning engineer, but she often assigned herself hard-to-build models to increase her models’ precision rate. Nonetheless, each of these difficult-to-build models require more than two weeks of training and parameter tweaking. In other words, my sister’s learning pace became sluggish. Eventually, she did not learn as much new knowledge every month compared to me.
In conclusion, I maintain that partaking in group activities and constantly providing contributions is the most ideal way of improving one’s productivity considering the aforementioned reasons. Of course, doing additional work or assignments can boost one’s performance, too. Nevertheless, I believe that discussing topics and proposing ideas in a group is more helpful.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 300, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to design'
Suggestion: To design
... one of the members of Machine Learning Design Team in TIC. My boss required all membe...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 728, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to engineer'
Suggestion: to engineer
...ister also worked as a machine learning engineer, but she often assigned herself hard-to...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, nevertheless, nonetheless, so, for example, in conclusion, of course, as a result, in other words, on the contrary, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 15.1003584229 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 46.0 43.0788530466 107% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 52.1666666667 98% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2460.0 1977.66487455 124% => OK
No of words: 444.0 407.700716846 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.54054054054 4.8611393121 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.5903493882 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.24901888133 2.67179642975 122% => OK
Unique words: 250.0 212.727598566 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.563063063063 0.524837075471 107% => OK
syllable_count: 755.1 618.680645161 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 9.59856630824 167% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.6003584229 126% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.362272486 48.9658058833 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.6153846154 100.406767564 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0769230769 20.6045352989 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.26923076923 5.45110844103 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 11.8709677419 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0801753204414 0.236089414692 34% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0247451663422 0.076458572812 32% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0458902643452 0.0737576698707 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0697473216462 0.150856017488 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0437760484055 0.0645574589148 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 11.7677419355 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 58.1214874552 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.56 10.9000537634 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.78 8.01818996416 110% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 86.8835125448 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => 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: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.