The lecture points out the weaknesses of teamwork based on the research, and this does not agree with the reading passage, which suggests some beneficial effects for such a way for doing works.
To begin with, according to the lecture many members got a free ride while the success of a group contribute to all members and that made creative members unhappy while the reading passage suggests the contributive members in a group will feel better.
Secondly, the professor says some projects go slowly in a group because it took a long time to please members about how work should go on, by contrast, the passage claims work would be done quickly in teams.
Finally, the lecture suggests some members who have a voice in a group may raise or drop some specific ideas while ignoring the others and that place failure blame on all members in the other hand the reading passage argues individual team member has a chance to shine.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, if, may, second, secondly, so, while, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 1.0 10.4613686534 10% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 12.0772626932 33% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 4.0 22.412803532 18% => OK
Preposition: 20.0 30.3222958057 66% => 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: 776.0 1373.03311258 57% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 162.0 270.72406181 60% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.79012345679 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.56762134501 4.04702891845 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.33039203211 2.5805825403 90% => OK
Unique words: 102.0 145.348785872 70% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.62962962963 0.540411800872 117% => OK
syllable_count: 235.8 419.366225166 56% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 4.0 13.0662251656 31% => 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: 40.0 21.2450331126 188% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 31.064449134 49.2860985944 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 194.0 110.228320801 176% => OK
Words per sentence: 40.5 21.698381199 187% => OK
Discourse Markers: 16.25 7.06452816374 230% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 21.4 13.3589403974 160% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.34 53.8541721854 73% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.7 11.0289183223 160% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.39 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.45 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 29.0 63.6247240618 46% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 10.7273730684 163% => OK
gunning_fog: 18.0 10.498013245 171% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 11.2008830022 161% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.