When classmates or colleagues communicate about a project in person instead of by e-mail, they will produce better work for the project.
Suffering from the COVID-19, many students and workers are forced to study and work remotely without communicating in person. After experiencing the on-cloud work and study, I totally agree with the statement that people are more likely to produce better work if they can discuss and exchange their opinions in person. I will explain the detailed reasons in the following paragraphs.
Firstly, problems can be more easily to be observed and tackled when people can communicate in person. To begin with, people are more likely to be concentrated on issues their teammates are stressing if they are in a same meeting room. On the contrary, your colleague may read your emails while drinking milk and playing with his dogs. They can't feel the urgency of your issues and are more likely to put it aside till you call him again. My experience is a great example of this point. I once leadered a group to design a smart garbage bin. At the beginning, we totally communicate with each other by sending email and I found that there was too much things needed to be checked more than twice, wasting considerable time. Everyone holds their own understanding about an issues so that it’s hard to make a consensus. Therefore, we made efforts in finding ways to communicate face to face. Eventually, we found that even an online video meeting worked better than emails since we could see others’ reaction to each proposal and adjusted the details accordingly.
Secondly, brilliant ideas are more easily to be generated when people are discussing face to face. It’s known that the words is not the only way where humans express themselves. More than half of the information is expressed by facial expressions and body languages which can’t be contained in emails. Moreover, designers are usually willing to draw some drafts and make some prototype when discussing, which can’t be shown well in an email. The project mentioned in the last paragraph was still a good example. We needed to design the appearance of the garbage bin to improve its user-experience and my teammates and I who majored in science had no idea about how the different detailed designs affected the users’ feeling even if the student majored in industry design used over thousands of words to explain it. However, as soon as we saw and touched the prototype in the real world, we knew the difference caused by detailed design and came up with the idea that using the elliptic paraboloid as its basic structure.
It is admitted that emails leave more space for people to consider and organize their words. However, those advantages of face-to-face communication mentioned above overwhelm the elaborately organized words.
To conclude, I believe that communicating in person can produce a better work.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 342, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...ng milk and playing with his dogs. They cant feel the urgency of your issues and are...
^^^^
Line 3, column 490, Rule ID: PRP_RB_NO_VB[1]
Message: Are you missing a verb?
...nce is a great example of this point. I once leadered a group to design a smart garbage bin. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 648, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...ng email and I found that there was too much things needed to be checked more than t...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, first, firstly, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, well, while, as to, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 15.1003584229 146% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.0286738351 136% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 43.0788530466 107% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 52.1666666667 119% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2322.0 1977.66487455 117% => OK
No of words: 462.0 407.700716846 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02597402597 4.8611393121 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63618218583 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71835275987 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 259.0 212.727598566 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.560606060606 0.524837075471 107% => OK
syllable_count: 736.2 618.680645161 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 15.0 9.59856630824 156% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.0937902775 48.9658058833 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.956521739 100.406767564 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0869565217 20.6045352989 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.39130434783 5.45110844103 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => 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: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.188478302465 0.236089414692 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0523645510137 0.076458572812 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0617023761437 0.0737576698707 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1367721806 0.150856017488 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.088738365299 0.0645574589148 137% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 11.7677419355 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 58.1214874552 88% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 10.9000537634 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.01818996416 107% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 86.8835125448 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.