working as team working
The passage stated group working benefits for both company and individual, which was in stark contrast to and refuted by the lecture.
The reading was stated that groupworking is beneficial approach to complete project in less time with highly creative because variaty of people in group have variety of knowledge and experience. However, the lecturer countered by the reading passage giving example that, even there are expertised and skilled members at team, there are free riders in team with no contribution but still receives positive feedback evaluated by team.
In addition, lecturer says that in group project, some group takes long to be consistent, going against the reading, which stated groups and teams makes decition faster than individuals. Lecturer furtherly explain that, sometimes it takes long time when meeting with many different people in group.
Lastly, reading passage stated that individual can increase their chance of their career when they work as group. Also, if they team work accomplished successfully, individuals can benefits. On the contrary, in lecture, it was mentioned that individual or maybe some managers idea could lead to risk of failure in project. For example, professor gives example that if some managers developed the idea that never works for team instead of dropping the idea, whole team might fail and blamed not only manager.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 268, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...es it takes long time when meeting with many different people in group. Lastly, reading pass...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 268, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'managers'' or 'manager's'?
Suggestion: managers'; manager's
...mentioned that individual or maybe some managers idea could lead to risk of failure in p...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, lastly, may, so, still, for example, in addition, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1163.0 1373.03311258 85% => OK
No of words: 217.0 270.72406181 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.35944700461 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.8380880478 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56896633185 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.640552995392 0.540411800872 119% => OK
syllable_count: 354.6 419.366225166 85% => OK
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: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 48.2447464037 49.2860985944 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.222222222 110.228320801 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1111111111 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.88888888889 7.06452816374 140% => 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 : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.264793559501 0.272083759551 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117936101494 0.0996497079465 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112580404252 0.0662205650399 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147156460373 0.162205337803 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.100724108444 0.0443174109184 227% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 13.3589403974 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.1 12.2367328918 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.63 8.42419426049 114% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.