Only experts of any particular field are considered reliable for reviewing work in any given field. The judgment done by callow arbiters gets very minuscule amount of recognition. The assertion that valuable inputs can only be provided by experts stands true for several reasons.
Firstly, only experts have insights on nuance of the work. It is through their dedication to the field, that they get well acquainted with nitty-gritty of an outstanding accomplishment. Take for an example, on release of any movie, a plethora of criticism can be observed from audience, but only the person with profound knowledge of acting, scripts and direction are hired by media and newspapers for reviews.
Which brings us to our second point that knowledge is very important to criticize someone's work, without having profound knowledge it is impossible to provide reliable and sensible inputs while judging. Knowledge gives experts and upper hand to novice. Additionally, experience in the field also matters, experienced people know the assiduousness required to complete any specific work. Only a dexterous painter can recognize the effort that was put into capturing an emotion in the painting.
However, one can challenge that every expert was once an amateur and it is only through the chances given to them that they made this far. It is true, even the work of critiques gets criticized. For becoming a renowned critique one has to bear both the boons and bane of the field, which is considered at the bottom of food chain in any industry. Furthermore, beginner are said to have more imaginative approach than experts. This imagination and creativity is what amateurs bring with them and that is what gets them opportunities to make their contributions, and gain credibility.
Conclusively, on basis of elaborations given above we can say that imagination and creativity has its own importance but it is the experience and knowledge which steals the show. Therefore, judgement received form an expert of field always gains more importance than the one given by an amateur.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, second, so, therefore, well, while, as to, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 58.6224719101 73% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1745.0 2235.4752809 78% => OK
No of words: 334.0 442.535393258 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2245508982 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27500489853 4.55969084622 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90806119144 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 215.323595506 87% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.562874251497 0.4932671777 114% => OK
syllable_count: 549.9 704.065955056 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.740449438202 0% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.3283609826 60.3974514979 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.647058824 118.986275619 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6470588235 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.23529411765 5.21951772744 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.222751248108 0.243740707755 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0700970242662 0.0831039109588 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0538950649576 0.0758088955206 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.132161202006 0.150359130593 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0190215821868 0.0667264976115 29% => 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: 13.0 14.1392134831 92% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.1639044944 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 100.480337079 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.