Both the reading and the lecture discuss teams in projects. While the reading states that teams have several advantages. The lecture cast doubts this idea by saying that it has drawbacks instead of advantages.
First of all, the reading passage claims that team in project are beneficial since the team has a high number of members that can provide creative ideas and skills that can not be possible to ask for an individual. The professor opposes this idea by saying that the recognition that individuals receives from his contribution is minimal and members that do not contribute at all get the recognition of the group making this unfair.
Secondly, the reading passage argues that teams work faster and come up with good ideas to solve problems. Moreover,the teams have the possibility to take decision that required some degree of risk because the responability is splitted in all the member and not only in one individual. The professor counters that idea by explaing that , in fact , teams in project spend more time to have an agremment since there are different opinions from all the members of the group.
Finally, The reading passage informs that working in team is rewarding for all the members since they can express their opinions and participate. The professor goes againist that idea by saying that influential people in a group sometimes can not be taken into account if their ideas is not according to the goals of the groups; However, if other people convince the group about an idea and they fail , the responsibility is splitted for all the members in the group even if you went against that idea.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 61, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “While” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... the lecture discuss teams in projects. While the reading states that teams have seve...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 116, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , the
...h good ideas to solve problems. Moreover,the teams have the possibility to take deci...
^^^^
Line 5, column 336, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ssor counters that idea by explaing that , in fact , teams in project spend more ...
^^
Line 5, column 346, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ers that idea by explaing that , in fact , teams in project spend more time to ha...
^^
Line 5, column 348, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s that idea by explaing that , in fact , teams in project spend more time to have...
^^
Line 7, column 174, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...participate. The professor goes againist that idea by saying that influential peo...
^^
Line 7, column 279, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s can not be taken into account if their ideas is not according to the goals of t...
^^
Line 7, column 403, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ce the group about an idea and they fail , the responsibility is splitted for all ...
^^
Line 7, column 506, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...oup even if you went against that idea.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, while, as to, in fact, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1354.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 274.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94160583942 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6008118218 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 137.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 410.4 419.366225166 98% => OK
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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 27.0 21.2450331126 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 86.4708043215 49.2860985944 175% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.4 110.228320801 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.4 21.698381199 126% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.1 7.06452816374 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 4.19205298013 215% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.4302923934 0.272083759551 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.162180944127 0.0996497079465 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0734114076683 0.0662205650399 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.255551410945 0.162205337803 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0822727452866 0.0443174109184 186% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.3589403974 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 53.8541721854 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 11.0289183223 114% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.67 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.91 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 63.6247240618 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.498013245 122% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.