Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
When classmates or colleagues communicate about a project in person instead of by email, they will produce better work for the project.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer
In schools or workplaces, people can either meet face-to-face or communicate by email in order to finish their projects. In my perspective, working in person is far more superior to emailing.
First, meeting face-to-face can ensure the clarity and responsiveness of communication between members, increasing the efficiency of the work. During face-to-face meetings, people can perceive ideas and questions quickly as well as give instantaneous responses, helping them to elaborate on many details of the project at ease. My personal example would be perfect. At school, I used to work on a project with some partners through email during the first days. However, we had a rough time communicating with one another due to the delays between sending and receiving replies. Consequently, we did not get anything done properly. Therefore, in order to bolster the productivity of our work, we decided to gather all together for better communication between members. This change was beneficial for the group since converging in one place allowed us to discuss ideas continuously without any time being wasted on writing responses. As a result, we ended up finishing the project on the day when we began talking directly.
Second, interpersonal communication can help create various creative ideas during discussion. When working in person, people always have paper and pens available to work with. They can use these items to sketch a mindmap, helping stimulate their creativity to think of many ideas which can be useful for the projects. For example, my Physics teacher used to assign me and a few others to solve a sophisticated problem. When we first began our project, we faced several setbacks such as forgetting the formulas, having trouble understanding the phenomenon and so on. To deal with this, the team decided to sketch a map that links all the details of the problem to enhance our thinking. Subsequently, we found the ultimate solution to the problem. I believe this benefit can hardly be obtained through emailing since email does not have the tools to sketch. Even when the map was drawn by someone, that person still had to photoshoot it and send it to the rest, which would be burdensome and could impair the thought flow of the team.
In conclusion, communicating in person boosts the productivity of students or colleagues in a project because it helps them to discuss more clearly and stimulate their creativity to think of many ideas that can benefit their project.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-08-17 | quanlqd | 76 | view |
| 2021-06-15 | false_shakespeare | 76 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 97
- Why are u here 88
- Some students prefer to study alone Others prefer to study with a group of students Which do you prefer Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Governments should spend more money in support of arts than in support of athletics such as state sponsored Olympic teams Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 90
- Some students prefer to study alone Others prefer to study with a group of students Which do you prefer Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 87
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1034, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ld impair the thought flow of the team. In conclusion, communicating in person b...
^^^^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... ideas that can benefit their project.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, however, second, so, still, therefore, well, as for, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 15.1003584229 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 43.0788530466 81% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 52.1666666667 134% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2091.0 1977.66487455 106% => OK
No of words: 406.0 407.700716846 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15024630542 4.8611393121 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48881294772 4.48103885553 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93442801438 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 212.727598566 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.556650246305 0.524837075471 106% => OK
syllable_count: 641.7 618.680645161 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 9.59856630824 135% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.5866174472 48.9658058833 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.5714285714 100.406767564 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3333333333 20.6045352989 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.38095238095 5.45110844103 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.20427516376 0.236089414692 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0628824011909 0.076458572812 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0449106884757 0.0737576698707 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130165783894 0.150856017488 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0314121334796 0.0645574589148 49% => 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: 12.5 11.7677419355 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 58.1214874552 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.59 10.9000537634 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.01818996416 105% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 86.8835125448 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.002688172 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.