Generally in software industry, when product managers are planning the task schedule for their engineers, there are two kinds of strategy to approach. One strategy is to finish as many tasks as possible in a work week, the other one is planning each task as elaborated as possible and let the engineers to do only one task in a work week. Which strategy is superior? This topic has been hotly debated for countless years, however, it is my contention that we should always follow the slow strategy. Let me elaborate.
First of all, when the time is limited and the deadline is near, engineers would become panic and rush their works. This may produce a lot of bugs inside out software. If there are bugs, engineers would need to debug their software, which is notorious of time consuming and frustrating. Sometimes the bugs would be so small that no one notices it, and then they would produce more bugs based on them. When the engineers notice this situation, usually it is too late and the only way the could do is to start over again.
Secondly, it never harms to plan your software structure as deep as possible beforehand. If we have plenty of time to plan our software, many potential bugs would not appear in the first place. For example, one of a project in my team is not well designed enough. When the engineers completed the software, they found out that the schema of the output data is totally different to what the client wants. This reason behind this is that the client changed their request document during our planning phase, and the manager is too eager to finish the software on time and did not notice the change. As a result, we have to redesign our software and the ship date is, of course, delayed by this.
To conclude, I think we should focus more on qualities rather than quantities. Working slowly may have lower production rate than its counterpart on the first glance, but the production rate is more stable and safe and have the potential to surpass thein the long run.
- What has caused Little Ice Age 90
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?In today's world it is more important to work quickly and risk making mistakes than to work slowly and make sure that everything is correct.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 3
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?In today's world it is more important to work quickly and risk making mistakes than to work slowly and make sure that everything is correct.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 3
- In the past century, the steady growth of the human population and the corresponding increase in agriculture and pesticide use have caused much harm to wildlife in the United States—birds in particular. 81
- What is the purpose of the carved stone? 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 147, Rule ID: ON_FIRST_GLANCE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'at'?
Suggestion: at
...er production rate than its counterpart on the first glance, but the production ra...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, well, for example, i think, of course, as a result, first of all, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 15.1003584229 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 43.0788530466 79% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 52.1666666667 71% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1654.0 1977.66487455 84% => OK
No of words: 356.0 407.700716846 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.64606741573 4.8611393121 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34372677135 4.48103885553 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.39645432023 2.67179642975 90% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 212.727598566 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.525280898876 0.524837075471 100% => OK
syllable_count: 512.1 618.680645161 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.51630824373 92% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.51792114695 199% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.94265232975 40% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.578221025 48.9658058833 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.8888888889 100.406767564 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7777777778 20.6045352989 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.88888888889 5.45110844103 145% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 11.8709677419 34% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.88709677419 184% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0680328999095 0.236089414692 29% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0180093591328 0.076458572812 24% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0263924653098 0.0737576698707 36% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0476322893144 0.150856017488 32% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0352351632174 0.0645574589148 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.4 11.7677419355 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 58.1214874552 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 10.1575268817 82% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.69 10.9000537634 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.46 8.01818996416 93% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 86.8835125448 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => 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.
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.