Reading material
In many organizations, perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team. Having a team of people attack a project offers several advantages. First of all, a group of people has a wider range of knowledge，expertise, and skills than any single individual is likely to possess. Also, because of the numbers of people involved and the greater resources they possess, a group can work more quickly in response to the task assigned to it and can come up with highly creative solutions to problems and issues. Sometimes these creative solutions come about because a group is more likely to make risky decisions that an individual might not undertake. This is because the group spreads responsibility for a decision to all the members and thus no single individual can be held accountable if the decision turns out to be wrong.
Taking part in a group process can be very rewarding for members of the team. Team members who have a voice in making a decision will no doubt feel better about carrying out the work that is entailed by the decision than they might doing work that is imposed on them by others. Also, the individual team member has a much better chance to “shine”, to get his or her contributions and ideas not only recognized but recognized as highly significant, because a team’s overall results can be more far-reaching and have greater impact than what might have otherwise been possible for the person to accomplish or contribute working alone.
The reading and the lecture are both about working as a team. The author of the reading believe that working as a team is the best approach for a certain new project. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. The speaker thinks that working as a team can cause negative impacts rather than benefits.
First of all, the author claims that a group can process the work more quickly than a individual because the group has more resources from the group members. This point is challenged by the lecturer. He said that when working with many people, the group takes long time to reach the consensus. Furthermore, the teamwork need many meetings, so that it consumes more time than working alone.
Second, the author states that the group member has a better change to shine or to get recognition from his or her contribution than individual worker, because the output of the group project can be far better than single project. The professor suggests that this fact is misleading. He argues that when the project done, other people will recognize the success as a whole team's contribution, even-though there are some free-riders, who didn't help working, gaining the credit with the team. This lead the real contributor miss the change to shine.
In conclusion, the lecture and the reading are both about the team-working. The professor effectively challenges the claims made in the article.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 168, 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.
...est approach for a certain new project. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made...
^^^
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.
...oubt on the claims made in the article. The speaker thinks that working as a team c...
^^^
Line 3, column 85, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
... can process the work more quickly than a individual because the group has more r...
^
Line 5, column 461, Rule ID: ADVISE_VBG[5]
Message: The verb 'help' is used with infinitive: 'to work' or 'work'.
Suggestion: to work; work
... some free-riders, who didn't help working, gaining the credit with the team. This...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'first', 'furthermore', 'second', 'so', 'in conclusion', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.243542435424 0.261695866417 93% => OK
Verbs: 0.158671586716 0.158904122519 100% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0664206642066 0.0723426182421 92% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0369003690037 0.0435111971325 85% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0184501845018 0.0277247811725 67% => OK
Prepositions: 0.121771217712 0.128828473217 95% => OK
Participles: 0.0369003690037 0.0370669169778 100% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.62666883475 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0147601476015 0.0208969081088 71% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.00154638098197 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.180811808118 0.128158765124 141% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0147601476015 0.0158828679856 93% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0110701107011 0.0114777025283 96% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1422.0 1645.83664459 86% => OK
No of words: 238.0 271.125827815 88% => OK
Chars per words: 5.97478991597 6.08160592843 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92775363542 4.04852973271 97% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.348739495798 0.374372842146 93% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.260504201681 0.287516216867 91% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.155462184874 0.187439937562 83% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.105042016807 0.113142543107 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62666883475 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 129.0 145.348785872 89% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.542016806723 0.539623497131 100% => OK
Word variations: 51.5821113104 53.8517498576 96% => OK
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0529801325 107% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.7502111507 78% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.8390183251 49.3711431718 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.571428571 132.220823453 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 21.7502111507 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.5 0.878197800319 57% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 3.39072847682 118% => OK
Readability: 43.0504201681 50.5018328374 85% => OK
Elegance: 1.87931034483 1.90840788429 98% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.262752965399 0.451937469235 58% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.106943741725 0.142949733639 75% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0806832728265 0.0787303798458 102% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.643052342107 0.631733273073 102% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.143768506466 0.139662658121 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.114769769574 0.21790590567 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0758497387447 0.0871468918476 87% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.473049291581 0.414875509568 114% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.031123714687 0.0530846634433 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.186184977093 0.332364718235 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0524404849008 0.0446026805963 118% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.26048565121 70% => OK
Positive topic words: 5.0 3.49668874172 143% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 3.62251655629 138% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 3.1766004415 94% => OK
Total topic words: 13.0 10.2958057395 126% => OK
---------------------
Rates: 83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations to cover all aspects.