One of the long standing debate many organisations are currently concerned about is whether to assemble a group of a people into a team for new projects or not. The reading states that it is better to form a team rather than individual working on the project. However, the lecturer casts concerns on main points stated in the reading and provides reasons for his opinion.
First of all, According to the passage, An individual has more chance to get his ideas recognised when working in a team, as the overall results are more far fetching and have bigger impact. Nevertheless, the lecturer refutes this point. He argues that few people get free rides when working in a team and all the people in the team get recognised equally. Due to this, the main contributors feel that they are not recognised and they feel unsatisfied.
Second, The article states that more people will be involved in a group and as they possess greater resources, they can work more quickly on the assigned task compared to an individual. However, the lecturer opposes this point by stating that due to more people being involved in the task, they cannot reach to a conclusion quickly. So, they spend more time in meetings on planning than working on the issue.
Finally, the article claims that the team members who have a voice will now feel better, as they donot have to work on tasks imposed on them anymore. Instead, they can work on the task entailed by the decision. To this point, the lecturer argues that due to such influential people, there is a good chance that opinions of less influential people gets ignored. Moreover, when the task at hand fails due to such decisions influenced by these people, the blame falls on the entire team due to such decisions.
In conclusion, even though both the reading and the lecture are about the debate of whether to have a team working on new project or not, the opinions are contrasting. The main points made in the reading are effectively challenged by the lecturer.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, moreover, nevertheless, second, so, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 30.3222958057 152% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1657.0 1373.03311258 121% => OK
No of words: 348.0 270.72406181 129% => OK
Chars per words: 4.76149425287 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31911543099 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53528898741 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.485632183908 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 504.0 419.366225166 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.0968658228 49.2860985944 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.5625 110.228320801 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.75 21.698381199 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.8125 7.06452816374 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.218341067313 0.272083759551 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0741358682317 0.0996497079465 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.087390196865 0.0662205650399 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131003242961 0.162205337803 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0592884218162 0.0443174109184 134% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 53.8541721854 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.33 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.