The reading passage states that a group of people formed for a project is is a great approach because of some reasons and esplains those facts. However, the professor explains that the rasults of a company's few projects shows that the reasons are not correct. So he refutes all of the reasons.
First, the reading claims that a group of people have wider range of knowledge, expertise, and skills than any single person. But the finding provides that some peoples have did nothing for the projects. The attitudes of peoples working in a group isn't same as the reading passage.
There is also the fact, the reading states that the project work will be more quickly in case of agroup of people. However, the finding of the company shows that some projects have not moved fast as desired.
Additionally, the reading article posits that the group spreads responsibility for a decision to all the members. In contrast to the claim, the professor explains that every group has one or two influencer whose decision is followed despite of correctness.
Moreover, the reading says that a group of people take more risks to do great job. However, the professor refutes that claim explaining that the influencers of the group take risks regardless of the merit of the decision. Finally, the projects become unsuccesful and all of the group members have to bear the results of failure. This failure reduces the chances of shining of all the group members.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 72, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: is
... a group of people formed for a project is is a great approach because of some reason...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 275, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
... reasons are not correct. So he refutes all of the reasons. First, the reading claims t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 175, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'done'.
Suggestion: done
...finding provides that some peoples have did nothing for the projects. The attitudes...
^^^
Line 3, column 249, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...attitudes of peoples working in a group isnt same as the reading passage. There i...
^^^^
Line 7, column 57, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'spreads'' or 'spread's'?
Suggestion: spreads'; spread's
...e reading article posits that the group spreads responsibility for a decision to all th...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 188, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...fessor explains that every group has one or two influencer whose decision is foll...
^^
Line 7, column 197, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'influencer' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'influencers'.
Suggestion: influencers
...plains that every group has one or two influencer whose decision is followed despite of c...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 61, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'risks doing'.
Suggestion: risks doing
...g says that a group of people take more risks to do great job. However, the professor refut...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 141, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...essor refutes that claim explaining that the influencers of the group take risks ...
^^
Line 9, column 269, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...ly, the projects become unsuccesful and all of the group members have to bear the results ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, moreover, so, in contrast, in contrast to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => 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: 1210.0 1373.03311258 88% => OK
No of words: 246.0 270.72406181 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.91869918699 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96035189615 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52204242574 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 123.0 145.348785872 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 361.8 419.366225166 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.833655082 49.2860985944 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.4285714286 110.228320801 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5714285714 21.698381199 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 7.06452816374 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 4.19205298013 239% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
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: 10.5 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 53.8541721854 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.96 12.2367328918 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.07 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.