Imagine that you are in a classroom or a meeting. The teacher or the meeting leader says something incorrect in your opinion, which of the following is the best thing to do?
•Interrupt and correct the mistake right away.
•Wait until the class or meeting is over and the people are gone, and then talk to the teacher or meeting leader.
•Say nothing.
We live in a world in which teachers and leaders are considered as a wisdom person. However, among a wide spectrum of people, there can be individuals who have a different argument about a subject in comparison to them. In this regard, some people prefer to say their opposing opinion with such people just at that moment, whereas others prefer to say nothing and ignore it. I, personally, do believe that debating after a presentation is much more practical than two other suggestions, for two reasons which are elaborated upon hereunder.
To begin with, having a deep discussion during a presentation with a limited time seems impossible. With this in mind, it would be better if two persons having a different idea about a subject, go to teachers' office and speak there. By doing so, they can have enough time to hear different reasons and challenge the subject from different perspectives, thereby coming to a conclusion that which one is correct. By interrupting a speech, however, might be lead to disruption in other audiences' plan which they have after the meeting. In today's hectic life, time is "gold" for most human beings. Consequently, it would not be exaggerating to say that such chaotic resulting from interruption among a meeting is unjustifiable for individuals. For example, maybe they have other plans after presentation which should show up there and they do not want to waste their time with this discussion. Thus, interrupting a person's speaking not only can waste time from other people, but also can seem as an impolite behavior.
Additionally, rarely can be guaranteed that a person's opinion about a subject always be correct. It is crystal clear that people look, investigate, and reason problems form their perspective. Therefore, accepting and believing in anything without thinking about it can be illogical. As a result, saying nothing and just ignore the subject can be harmful to both speakers and audiences. If a teacher' opinion is unreasonable and wrong, indeed, it will result in misleading others. Whereas, after the presentation, people can ask presenter more explanation as to his or her thought, argument and reason, as well as their basis. The more valid discussion individuals have with one another, the more they can perceive and accept their opposing opinion. Having discussed with one another, and having read the references, they can possibly come to a conclusion whether accept others' opinion or otherwise.
In the light of these crucial results, I strictly am of the opinion that having a discussion after the present is more beneficial than other ways. By such way, not only can individuals speak many hours without annoying other people, but also they can exchange their information in order to make a flawless decision.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 47, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'persons'' or 'person's'?
Suggestion: persons'; person's
...onally, rarely can be guaranteed that a persons opinion about a subject always be corre...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 821, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'can'.
Suggestion: can
...r, and having read the references, they can possibly come to a conclusion whether accept oth...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, however, if, look, may, so, therefore, thus, well, whereas, as to, for example, as a result, as well as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 9.8082437276 173% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 13.8261648746 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 43.0788530466 81% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 52.1666666667 111% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2337.0 1977.66487455 118% => OK
No of words: 455.0 407.700716846 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13626373626 4.8611393121 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61852021839 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89787199823 2.67179642975 108% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 212.727598566 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.503296703297 0.524837075471 96% => OK
syllable_count: 722.7 618.680645161 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 4.94265232975 202% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.8438082785 48.9658058833 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.227272727 100.406767564 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6818181818 20.6045352989 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5 5.45110844103 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0985171573393 0.236089414692 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0349353166601 0.076458572812 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0338559648083 0.0737576698707 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0633466430007 0.150856017488 42% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0332314446055 0.0645574589148 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 11.7677419355 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 58.1214874552 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 10.9000537634 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.2 8.01818996416 102% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 86.8835125448 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => 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.