when classmates or colleagues communicate about a project in person instead of by e-mail, they will produce better work for the project.
In today’s complicated and progressed world in which we live, it is advisable that projects are done in a group in order to achieve a pleasant goal. In this regard, while some people think that doing a group project with the group members in person would be more beneficial than working on it by e-mail, it may be true in limited conditions. Personally speaking, I am of the opinion that group members, in order to complete the project well, should communicate by e-mail rather than in person. My viewpoint is based on some reasons, two compelling ones of which are elaborated upon hereunder.
To begin with, interacting with the group members by e-mail so as to work on the project can lead group members to focus more on their project than carrying it out face to face, meaning that their project can be completed perfectly. To be more specific, when people are aggregated in a specified place in order to do their group project, they will be more likely to be distracted by the presence of other members that may talk about irrelevant issues or their personal life. Moreover, the idea that may pop into their mind can be interrupted by other members’ thoughts and opinions. In this way, their concentration, which is one of the essential elements in accomplishing projects in a better way, will undoubtedly be disrupted when group members perform works in person. As a result, the efficiency of members working on the project will be increasingly descended due to being together.
Secondly, by having communication through e-mail, the members of a group project can avoid becoming tired resulting from commuting between the of group members’ hangout/resort and their home. No one can deny that when people are provided with an opportunity to communicate online with each other, they can prevent themselves from unnecessary commuting, which is a waste of both time and money for using public transportation or getting involved in crowded traffic. In the other words, should the group members be required to work on the project in person, they will suffer from energy-consuming commuting. In this way, when they reach the place, they will be too exhausted to do the project with energy and incentive. Therefore, their intellectual and physical efficiency will be undermined, which can negatively affect the results of the project. That is why I think that implementing a group project by e-mail can maintain the group members motivated and energetic to keep on it well.
To sum up, in order to finish the project perfectly, I do believe that online communicating with the group members, like by e-mail, would be more lucrative than working on it in person. Not only can this way help the group members make a better concentration on the project, but it also can contribute them to complete the project without any fatigue arising from energy-consuming commuting.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 61, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...acting with the group members by e-mail so as to work on the project can lead group memb...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, as to, i think, as a result, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 15.1003584229 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 23.0 9.8082437276 234% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.0286738351 172% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 43.0788530466 95% => OK
Preposition: 85.0 52.1666666667 163% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2401.0 1977.66487455 121% => OK
No of words: 480.0 407.700716846 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00208333333 4.8611393121 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68069463864 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89707032933 2.67179642975 108% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 212.727598566 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.4625 0.524837075471 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 731.7 618.680645161 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 9.59856630824 125% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.94265232975 243% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.6003584229 83% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 20.1344086022 139% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 49.5840832816 48.9658058833 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.235294118 100.406767564 141% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.2352941176 20.6045352989 137% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.58823529412 5.45110844103 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.88709677419 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.30399940649 0.236089414692 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.129462679661 0.076458572812 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0653093007668 0.0737576698707 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.221578491624 0.150856017488 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0278958754435 0.0645574589148 43% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 11.7677419355 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 58.1214874552 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 10.1575268817 128% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 10.9000537634 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 86.8835125448 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.002688172 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.0537634409 131% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => 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.