Sometimes we are assigned to work in a group on a project. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The group will be helped more by the person who will be willing to do what other group members want than by the person who often strongly insists that things should be done in a way that is different from what the group wants to do?
Humans are considered naturally as social creatures, which means that they tend to depend on social interactions for well-being. However, not all group works are considered prosperous. That what lies behind the success of a given group has always been a contentious issue. Some people hold the notion that in order for a group to succeed, its members should be compromising. Whereas, others hold an alternative perspective and believe that maverick leadership can be of more assistance in a given group's prosperity. In this regard, I stand with the former group for several reasons that are going to be delved deeper in the following paragraphs.
To commence with, people who are considerate of others' opinions and ideas can help group members to think of themselves as influential and effective members, which in return can incentivize people to come up with strategies and solutions to enhance the quality of the project and remove obstacles more readily. For example, when I was assigned a group project during my freshman year, m and group members tried to communicate efficiently and be open to each other's viewpoints. Hence, as a result, this caused less friction and tension among members and helped the project went smoothly. Furthermore, since all members had a say in all decisions all felt engaged and no one felt left out, and we all tried harder to come up with better ideas to perfect the assignment. On the other hand, my friend was in a group whose leader was dogmatic, a person who ignored others' ideas and imposed his decisions on others. Their project received a low score because everybody was disheartened and not motivated enough to collaborate.
Furthermore, since not everyone shares the same skill, knowledge, and perspective, the group can make use of all this diversity to achieve higher levels of accomplishment. In contrast, when ideas are restricted to only one person, the project's quality is likely to degrade dramatically. To be more clear, some people have better artistic skills, some others possess the scientific knowledge required for conducting the project, and others have better social skills. only by taking all these various abilities into consideration and harvesting different individuals' talents, a group can achieve the highest zenith of success and its ultimate goal. For instance, in tech companies, when a new project is defined, such as a new mobile app, each part of the project is delegated to different experts. For example, software engineers are responsible for the coding, the user interface is developed by UI experts, and marketing is conducted by people who have knowledge in this field.
To recapitulate, people who facilitate the smooth flow of communication between members of the group and enhance morals between them can incentivize people to work more sedulously, because people will feel more involved in the project. Moreover, incorporating different people's skills and knowledge in the project can enhance the work's quality substantially. Had it not been for the efficient distribution of responsibilities and correct means of communication between employees of eminent companies, such as Google, these companies would not have been able to conquer the highest summits of success.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 467, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Only
..., and others have better social skills. only by taking all these various abilities i...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, hence, however, if, moreover, so, well, whereas, as to, for example, for instance, in contrast, such as, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 15.1003584229 159% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 13.8261648746 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.0286738351 136% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 43.0788530466 56% => OK
Preposition: 69.0 52.1666666667 132% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.0752688172 161% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2741.0 1977.66487455 139% => OK
No of words: 520.0 407.700716846 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27115384615 4.8611393121 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77530192783 4.48103885553 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94891854111 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 266.0 212.727598566 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511538461538 0.524837075471 97% => OK
syllable_count: 850.5 618.680645161 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.51792114695 199% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.94265232975 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.1344086022 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.4442212576 48.9658058833 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.523809524 100.406767564 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7619047619 20.6045352989 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.28571428571 5.45110844103 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => 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: 0.284442387063 0.236089414692 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0845898068145 0.076458572812 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0599920146319 0.0737576698707 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171958530148 0.150856017488 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0527341169842 0.0645574589148 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 11.7677419355 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 58.1214874552 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.1575268817 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 10.9000537634 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.02 8.01818996416 112% => OK
difficult_words: 138.0 86.8835125448 159% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.0537634409 115% => 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: 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.