The reading and the speaker discuss working in a group from different perspectives. The speaker negates all the ideas has mentioned in the article.
First of all, the author of the reading points out that a group of people has a wider range of knowledge and skills. Therefore, they will be highly creative solutions to deal with problems. This point is challenged by the speaker. He restates the fact by giving an example of a company, which formed members to work in groups. After six month of working the company evaluated that these groups worked slowly because it took them a lot of time to have meetings to build up the agreement in the groups.
Secondly, the author of the reading contends that working in a group enables people to make risky decisions and if these decisions turn to be wrong, the whole people in the group will take responsibility. The speaker rebuts this idea by saying that usually in the group if some members influence on the group to make risky decisions, others in the group will drop their ideas to be negative. If some members make decisions and do not achieve a good result, they will be blamed by the rest of the group.
Finally, the author of the reading states that when people work in a group if someone make good contribution they will be recognized as highly significant. The speaker, on the other hand, opposes this point by saying if some members in a group contribute good work, the reward will be sent to the whole group, not individual at all. It makes contributors feel unhappy.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 339, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'month' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'months'.
Suggestion: months
...ed members to work in groups. After six month of working the company evaluated that t...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 87, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'someone' must be used with a third-person verb: 'makes'.
Suggestion: makes
... when people work in a group if someone make good contribution they will be recogniz...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, as to, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1259.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 270.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.66296296296 5.08290768461 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52006760638 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 135.0 145.348785872 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 379.8 419.366225166 91% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.2351615995 49.2860985944 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.8461538462 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7692307692 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.38461538462 7.06452816374 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => 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: 0.382391098785 0.272083759551 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.140911151786 0.0996497079465 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0820434775946 0.0662205650399 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.235341628541 0.162205337803 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0896030106379 0.0443174109184 202% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 53.8541721854 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.75 12.2367328918 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.73 8.42419426049 92% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.