group working
The reading and the lecture are both about assigning a team for handling a project. The author of the reading asserts that it can have some advantages if a project is done by a team of people. But, the lecturer challenges these claims made by the author. He is of the opinion that these assertions are correct.
First of all, the author states that people who work as a team can aggregate their skills, knowledge, and their experience to solve the issues and this is better way than that they work as an idividual. This argument is challenged by lecturer. He says that in a group there are some people that get credit of being in a group without contribution or appropriate effort to solve the problem, but a group is known as a whole, so the people who work with all their insight and effort aren't recognized from others.
Secondly, the writer contends that because of the numbers of people in the group involved, they can accomplish the task quickly also, they can come up with risky decisions better than an idividual, cuz the results are attributed to group instead of special person in a group. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by asserting that a group can achieve consensus hardly and for this they have to have many meeting to make agreement eventually.
Finally, it is states in the article that the individual team members can benefits form being in a group if the results are highly impressive. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that if the project is failed, the consequences of this will be on all members too.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-06-14 | talelaldabous | 60 | view |
| 2019-12-30 | sandiphinge86@gmail.com | 73 | view |
| 2019-06-10 | fredericomasc | 75 | view |
| 2019-02-25 | sara.87 | 73 | view |
| 2015-11-03 | wellington025 | 97 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 482, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
... work with all their insight and effort arent recognized from others. Secondly, th...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1271.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 272.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.67279411765 5.08290768461 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53069125898 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511029411765 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 388.8 419.366225166 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 77.7303029712 49.2860985944 158% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.545454545 110.228320801 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7272727273 21.698381199 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.45454545455 7.06452816374 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.288509279833 0.272083759551 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.080947244107 0.0996497079465 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.106584676682 0.0662205650399 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.148716969801 0.162205337803 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.123910328789 0.0443174109184 280% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 64.04 53.8541721854 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.1 12.2367328918 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.54 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.