It is tempting to think that finishing a project with members who have different ideas could rise the diversity of the team, leading to a better result of the team assignment. Nevertheless, from my perspective, working with people who share similar opinions is a more effective way to achieve success.
On the one hand, teaming up with classmates of a similar kind will reduce communication cost, which results from disagreements among team members. People who share the same character with each other are more likely to reach into an agreement quicker and easier since they share similar logical patterns. On the contrary, it is difficult for different types of students to agree with each other, which not only could cause conflicts among members but also could waste a significant amount of time during the process of negotiation. My roommate, for instance, once teamed up with her classmate to deliver a presentation in her Marketing class. Unfortunately, she and her team member shared entirely different value and interest. My roommate wanted to force on the finance industry and to make their PowerPoint looks more professional. However, her classmate's only attention was the video game industry, and he insisted on making their presentation more entertain and enjoyable. Eventually, their cooperation went to a dead end. They had to redo the project again separately a few days before the deadline, and their previous efforts were in vain.
On the other hand, it is almost impossible to find a perfect time of meeting for every team member if they have different personalities. The same kind of students is likely to have an identical lifestyle. It is not surprising, for example, that hard-working students usually get up early and typically do not stay up late. Nonetheless, people who enjoy night clubs and bars could not regulate themselves as strictly as other students. Taken my own experience as an example, my professor of Business Communication class trained our communication skills by teaming up six students of different personalities to finish homework. According to her, this method would substantially increase the difficulty of completing the assignment. She was correct. Some people were eager to finish it sooner while others did not want to start it until the deadline was approaching. Hard as we tried, our homework was completed in a hurry, and quarrels never stopped throughout the semester.
Admittedly, having a bunch of people who have different ideas could bring the team with unique insights of solving problems. Nevertheless, schoolwork, such as a presentation for English class or a Math question, is relatively simple and generally does not need extraordinary creativity.
In summary, no doubt working with people of similar mind is a more efficient method to finish a task because the same kind of people is usually more comfortable to communicate with. Besides, it will be less exhausting to arrange a suitable time for meetings.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...more effective way to achieve success. On the one hand, teaming up with classma...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... their previous efforts were in vain. On the other hand, it is almost impossib...
^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ever stopped throughout the semester. Admittedly, having a bunch of people who...
^^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...es not need extraordinary creativity. In summary, no doubt working with people...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, however, if, look, nevertheless, nonetheless, so, while, for example, for instance, in summary, kind of, no doubt, such as, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 43.0788530466 79% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 52.1666666667 130% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.0752688172 198% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2503.0 1977.66487455 127% => OK
No of words: 479.0 407.700716846 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2254697286 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67825486995 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99558821527 2.67179642975 112% => OK
Unique words: 263.0 212.727598566 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.549060542797 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 783.0 618.680645161 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 9.59856630824 167% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.6003584229 117% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.6078544649 48.9658058833 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.291666667 100.406767564 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9583333333 20.6045352989 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.41666666667 5.45110844103 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.214135246596 0.236089414692 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0560852336946 0.076458572812 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0617104351516 0.0737576698707 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143618016682 0.150856017488 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0825943259387 0.0645574589148 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 11.7677419355 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 58.1214874552 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 10.9000537634 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.01818996416 109% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 86.8835125448 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.002688172 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.247311828 137% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.