Goods and bads of work group
The reading and the lecture clearly disagree with each other, while the reading hugely supports team group as a good way of conducting work, citing many factors such as the possibility of taking in more complex tasks, the speed of which the projects can be done.
The wider set of skills and experience brought about by a larger number of people working together to reach a common goal, the fact that mistakes, when they occur, are shared by all team instead, inspire people to take more risks and possibly get better results, however, the lecture gives another perspective on the team group work.
It highlights that among its many flaws and problems, are the hardship in reaching a consensus, the risk of free-ride, which occurs when someone takes benefit over someone without having contributed to that. Or even when a small group of people take the decisions, and the rest only follows.
So while the work team was praised by the reading for its capacity to combine a pool of different talents, committed to a single task, the lecture claimed the difficulty of making decisions within a big group.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-03-09 | Davi Soares Alves | 76 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, so, while, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 10.4613686534 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 22.412803532 31% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 916.0 1373.03311258 67% => OK
No of words: 189.0 270.72406181 70% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.84656084656 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.70779275107 4.04702891845 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.41743941506 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 123.0 145.348785872 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.650793650794 0.540411800872 120% => OK
syllable_count: 277.2 419.366225166 66% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 5.0 13.0662251656 38% => 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: 37.0 21.2450331126 174% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 81.9570619288 49.2860985944 166% => OK
Chars per sentence: 183.2 110.228320801 166% => OK
Words per sentence: 37.8 21.698381199 174% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.2 7.06452816374 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.199680109204 0.272083759551 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101433201139 0.0996497079465 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0568625683155 0.0662205650399 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115623199808 0.162205337803 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0455426313308 0.0443174109184 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.3 13.3589403974 152% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.38 53.8541721854 79% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.5 11.0289183223 150% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.44 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.4 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 47.0 63.6247240618 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 26.0 10.7273730684 242% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 16.8 10.498013245 160% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.2008830022 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.