The text and lecturer offer two opposing views on the accuracy of the hypothesis which working in group possesses a list of advantages. While the text mentions some factors such as the broader knowledge and resources about the issue, a quick response to the situation, and rewarding aspect of teamwork as the benefits of this surmise, the professor counters these specific points and presents some clues to call into question for the information in the reading passage and come to her conclusion.
First of all, the lecturer refutes that all team members are beneficial for the teamwork, which in the reading part is named as one of the main positive sides of group activity. Inasmuch as each individual owns unique feature and knowledge, which the sum of them in the group can pave the path to the best outcome in comparison to the individual presentation with limited facilities. He asserts that based on an examination of a company which the performances of the employees in a specific group has been observed after a six months and it has been illustrated that a tangible portion of the members takes the advantages of other highly qualified members of the group. In addition, they receive the unfair and free rights which are not for the sake of their own capabilities.
Next, although the passage uses the surmise of quick presentation as the one of the merits of the group work, the professor rebuts the truth of this claim. As it states in the article, since the duty is divided among the members, it results as the quick response to the situation, which an individual is not able to handle it solely. As the lecturer mentions it is an arduous task for the team to make a cogent and unique decision in the short period. Since the ultimate decision is constructed based on the various ideas and it requires lots of meeting sessions to come to the final decision. That how the lecturer cast doubt on the accuracy of this aspect.
Finally, the man argues that the group work is rewarding. Meanwhile, the passage presumes as the whole plan of the group is shaped based upon all members’ performances, they can work more productively and have better chance to shine. Based on the professor's information this factor does have a rare impact of the success of the teamwork. As he mentioned in most of the occasion there are some members considered as influencers and they have the main influence on the team. As a result, in the majority, they make the ultimate decision. This idea is accepted by most of the team even there are some members who are not convinced with the idea. Moreover, if the team faces the failure whole team members have to pay the revenge.
The professor effectively challenges the claim made in the article.
- 1.Students should always question what they are taught instead of accepting it passively.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing 66
- College students should base their choice of a field of study on the availability of jobs in that field.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to 66
- do you agree or disagree with the following statements? Because people are busy doing so many different things, they do very things well. use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 3
- tpo 29.1 60
- Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookv 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 248, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
...ve better chance to shine. Based on the professors information this factor does have a rar...
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'finally', 'first', 'if', 'moreover', 'so', 'while', 'in addition', 'such as', 'as a result', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.26171875 0.261695866417 100% => OK
Verbs: 0.130859375 0.158904122519 82% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0703125 0.0723426182421 97% => OK
Adverbs: 0.025390625 0.0435111971325 58% => OK
Pronouns: 0.029296875 0.0277247811725 106% => OK
Prepositions: 0.1484375 0.128828473217 115% => OK
Participles: 0.0390625 0.0370669169778 105% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.64283906774 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0234375 0.0208969081088 112% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.00154638098197 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.18359375 0.128158765124 143% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.00390625 0.0158828679856 25% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.015625 0.0114777025283 136% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2744.0 1645.83664459 167% => OK
No of words: 475.0 271.125827815 175% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.77684210526 6.08160592843 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66845742379 4.04852973271 115% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.309473684211 0.374372842146 83% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.261052631579 0.287516216867 91% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.189473684211 0.187439937562 101% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.109473684211 0.113142543107 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64283906774 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 145.348785872 155% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.473684210526 0.539623497131 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 53.8603131091 53.8517498576 100% => OK
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0529801325 146% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 21.7502111507 115% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.7923610561 49.3711431718 154% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.421052632 132.220823453 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0 21.7502111507 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.578947368421 0.878197800319 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.39072847682 29% => OK
Readability: 51.1052631579 50.5018328374 101% => OK
Elegance: 2.42105263158 1.90840788429 127% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.549887131256 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.16287061728 0.142949733639 114% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0606422970794 0.0787303798458 77% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.698651218279 0.631733273073 111% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.122649441646 0.139662658121 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.266732575781 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.103435571967 0% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.617471673117 0.414875509568 149% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.108222371026 0.0530846634433 204% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.40443939384 0% => The content is off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0528353158467 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 4.33554083885 254% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.26048565121 117% => OK
Positive topic words: 10.0 3.49668874172 286% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 3.62251655629 83% => OK
Neutral topic words: 4.0 3.1766004415 126% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 10.2958057395 165% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Less content wanted. Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.