Knowing how to behave has always been a noteworthy matter when it comes to talking about teamwork. That is owing to the fact that there are many criteria which you should consider when you plan to do something as a group. There are a plethora of people who contend that a person who goes through the group and do whatever that other group members want, will be more helpful than someone who does everything in a way that other group members do not want. Others disagree. I, to a great extent, corroborate the first perspective as it seems rational. In what follows, I will attempt to clarify the reasons in support of my viewpoint in detail.
To commence with, the most imperative reason comes to mind at first is that the quality of collaboration which group members have. It is conspicouos that the collaboration is the most effective criteria in a group and if any group members distract it by their decision, they actually hurt the basic of the group. Let me tell something which I experienced during my sport team in the highschool. Our coach, always emphasis on being in the same final comment and have collaboration to reach the goal as a group team. We always do whatever all the group member accept in same and we were the best team ever as our coach said always. This experience taught me that how should be a person as a member in the group.
Another exquisite point to be mentioned here is about the profound hurt that a disagreement with a group can have for both the purpose of the group and the life of someone who disagreed. No one can deny the profound effect of disagreement in decrease the energy of the group. As a study which has been done recently by a group of social researcher in the University of Tehran, I want to mention that if all the member do not behave as the other member's belief, they never ever can reach their goal's. This study emphasis on the obnoxious effects of uneven group and how these different ideas can hurt the group. As you can see, this is obvious that be in the same stream with other group members can be more fruitful for the group.
To wrap it all up, taking the aforementioned ideas into consideration, we may draw the conclusion that not only can collaboration have good effect on the group but also the even group members can always do something constructive for the group. So, it is highly recommended that have a group that completely accept their beliefs.
- TPO-44 - Integrated Writing Task In 1957 a European silver coin dating to the eleventh century was discovered at a Native American archaeological site in the state of Maine in the United States. Many people believed the coin had been originally brought to 76
- TPO-43 - Integrated Writing Task Agnostids were a group of marine animals that became extinct about 450 million years ago. Agnostid fossils can be found in rocks in many areas around the world. From the fossil remains, we know that agnostids were primitiv 80
- TPO-41 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Teachers were more appreciated and valued by society in the past than they are nowadays.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 60
- At the end of the Triassic period 200 million years ago, there was a mass-extinction event that caused the extinction of more than half of all living species. It was this extinction event that allowed dinosaurs to become the dominant species for the next 80
- TPO-30 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is more enjoyable to have a job where you work only three days a week for long hours than to have a job where you work five days a week for shorter hours. Use spec 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 446, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'members'' or 'member's'?
Suggestion: members'; member's
...l the member do not behave as the other members belief, they never ever can reach their...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, if, may, so, talking about, to a great extent
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 15.1003584229 119% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 9.8082437276 133% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 13.8261648746 51% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 24.0 11.0286738351 218% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 44.0 43.0788530466 102% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 52.1666666667 96% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.0752688172 136% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1990.0 1977.66487455 101% => OK
No of words: 436.0 407.700716846 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.56422018349 4.8611393121 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56953094068 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5712553866 2.67179642975 96% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 212.727598566 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.451834862385 0.524837075471 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 609.3 618.680645161 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.51630824373 92% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 9.59856630824 135% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.1344086022 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.5621340604 48.9658058833 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.555555556 100.406767564 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2222222222 20.6045352989 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.05555555556 5.45110844103 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.431612743408 0.236089414692 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135001912721 0.076458572812 177% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.118612967339 0.0737576698707 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.283071961918 0.150856017488 188% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.100732578852 0.0645574589148 156% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 11.7677419355 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 64.04 58.1214874552 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.46 10.9000537634 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.47 8.01818996416 93% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 86.8835125448 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.002688172 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.0537634409 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => 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: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.