The reading and lecture both describe effect of team work, whereas lecture dispute reading passage with following points:
The passage stated that team work is best way to reach to certain decision, it's difficult for individual to make decision and accept the consequence of decision if the assignment fails.
Also team member has different skills, knowledge and expertise and if the assignment is successful its fortunate for all team member.
However, lecture claimed that not all member of team work with same level. And if the assignment get succeed its not fair to provide same portion to all member.
Furthermore, the reading claims team working is opportunity to recognize problem and provide solution whereas lecture state if project couldnt accomplish on time its not fair for hardworking members.
To conclude reading and lecture discuss impact of team work but lecture challenge reading with mentioned points.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 35, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[4]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'is the best'.
Suggestion: is the best
...nts: The passage stated that team work is best way to reach to certain decision, its d...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...e of decision if the assignment fails. Also team member has different skills, knowl...
^^^^
Line 5, column 136, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...lution whereas lecture state if project couldnt accomplish on time its not fair for har...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, if, so, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 10.4613686534 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 12.0772626932 17% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 6.0 22.412803532 27% => OK
Preposition: 15.0 30.3222958057 49% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 783.0 1373.03311258 57% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 145.0 270.72406181 54% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.4 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.47010008196 4.04702891845 86% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5883117871 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 80.0 145.348785872 55% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.551724137931 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 232.2 419.366225166 55% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.23620309051 36% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 6.0 13.0662251656 46% => 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: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 80.7040202771 49.2860985944 164% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.5 110.228320801 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1666666667 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06452816374 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.09492273731 147% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.24411531542 0.272083759551 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.139136160915 0.0996497079465 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0530689090335 0.0662205650399 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.141966022792 0.162205337803 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0605684014813 0.0443174109184 137% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 13.3589403974 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.34 12.2367328918 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 39.0 63.6247240618 61% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
More content wanted.
Minimum 150 words wanted.
Rates: 40.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 12.0 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.