The reading and the lecture are both about projects handled by work groups. The author of the reading feels that teamwork has many benefits instead of working on your own. The lecturer challenges this claim made by the author. The professor is of the opinion that there are many drawbacks when a team of people are dealing with a task. She supports that view based on an experiment that a company conducted with their employees.
To begin with, the author argues that having more people in a project gives the chance to have a wider range of knowledge than a single individual. The article mentions that by having more members working, they can resolve problems much quicker. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. She claims that in the companies’ experiment, they found out that they were taking more time to solve a problem. Additionally, she says that because the members took to long to reach an agreement about the project.
Secondly, the writer suggests that in a group project, an individual have a chance to stand out and shine far more than working by itself. In the article, it is said that the result of a group project has a much greater impact than when it is carried by a single person. The lecture, however, rebuts this by mentioning that in the experiment some people got a free ride. She elaborates on this bringing up the point that a few individuals did not contribute to the project; however, they got the same recognition as the ones that worked harder on the task.
Finally, the author posits that when working in group, individual members have a voice in making decisions. Moreover, it is stated in the article that this is very rewarding for them. In contrast, the lecturer’s position is that they found out that was not accurate. He notes that in the company’s experiment some individuals took control the project, leading to a small dictatorship. Therefore, members of the group lost their voice to their bossy colleagues.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 173, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...enefits instead of working on your own. The lecturer challenges this claim made by ...
^^^
Line 1, column 228, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...allenges this claim made by the author. The professor is of the opinion that there ...
^^^
Line 1, column 430, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...company conducted with their employees. To begin with, the author argues that ha...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, in contrast, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 22.0 12.0772626932 182% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 22.412803532 192% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 30.3222958057 152% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1652.0 1373.03311258 120% => OK
No of words: 339.0 270.72406181 125% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87315634218 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29091512845 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71313636511 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.507374631268 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 500.4 419.366225166 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 3.25607064018 338% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.636876691 49.2860985944 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.9473684211 110.228320801 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8421052632 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.05263157895 7.06452816374 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.144245322412 0.272083759551 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0460708579504 0.0996497079465 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0669920964032 0.0662205650399 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0960547640141 0.162205337803 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0618478375713 0.0443174109184 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.4 13.3589403974 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 53.8541721854 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.67 12.2367328918 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 63.6247240618 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.