The passage talked about how building a team can be very beneficial when you work in certain projects. According to the text a team is composed by several people with several different set of skills, knowledge and expertise, which make them a more powerful tool to attack projects in only one go. The text also mentioned how quick this projects can be finalized by a great number of people. In the end, the reading states how members of a team can be appraised, recognized and shine among others. However, the professor strongly disagree with the reading views, which I will be stated below.
Firstly, the text mentioned about the set of skills and knowledge the team might have and how beneficial this can be for a project. On the other hand, the lecturer refuse to believe that this is true stating that many members of a team can take a free ride on good projects and results. This people do not contribute at all for the overall outcome of the projects, but still benefits from it as part of a team.
Secondly, the passage affirmed that a team working towards projects can finish it quicker as they can delegate tasks and combine resources. The lecturer contradict this statement explaining that working as a team can be really messy and often people are not very organized. He also states that as a team all people have to have a say on the table, so they have to communicate and get the approval of everyone before start or complete a task, which can be really time consuming.
Thirdly, the article mentioned about team members been appraised and recognized by their efforts on specific projects or tasks. The professor refute this statement saying that if a project suffer a big loss or does not improved as it should be, the consequencies and the blaming will fall under everyone on the team, which occasionally is unfair.
In conclusion, the professor disagree with all three points stated in the text giving relevant and concrete examples that happens in a real world.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 168, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'several'.
Suggestion: several
...team is composed by several people with several different set of skills, knowledge and expertise,...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 288, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: These
...free ride on good projects and results. This people do not contribute at all for the...
^^^^
Line 5, column 91, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
... towards projects can finish it quicker as they can delegate tasks and combine res...
^^
Line 5, column 154, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'contradicts'.
Suggestion: contradicts
...sks and combine resources. The lecturer contradict this statement explaining that working ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 143, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'refutes'.
Suggestion: refutes
...ecific projects or tasks. The professor refute this statement saying that if a project...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 220, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[3]
Message: The verb 'does' requires base form of the verb: 'improve'
Suggestion: improve
...a project suffer a big loss or does not improved as it should be, the consequencies and ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, really, second, secondly, so, still, third, thirdly, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 5.04856512141 257% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 15.0 7.30242825607 205% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1645.0 1373.03311258 120% => OK
No of words: 346.0 270.72406181 128% => OK
Chars per words: 4.75433526012 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54299294619 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514450867052 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 504.9 419.366225166 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.4307620193 49.2860985944 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.5 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7142857143 21.698381199 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.92857142857 7.06452816374 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.377396859679 0.272083759551 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.145934212731 0.0996497079465 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0610668919623 0.0662205650399 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.203112305016 0.162205337803 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.109090955797 0.0443174109184 246% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.57 12.2367328918 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.88 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.