In any field of inquiry, the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important contributions.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
Although, a novice in a discipline might be able to present fresh ideas, some subjects require profound knowledge as a prerequisite to make any kind of contributions. Hence, it can be asserted that both a new perspective and some depth of knowledge is important to create innovations.
First of all, in the fields of literature, arts, and music, an expert may be exposed to the ideas and trends so that he will not be able to deviate from the current standards of creations. Arts in the romanticism era contain critical similarities such as the depiction of light in paintings because artists were exposed to contemporary views of the time and were strongly influenced by it. On the other hand, a neophyte artist may be unfamiliar with the current notions of art and will be able to produce paradigm shifting creations leading to a new era of art. Consequently, in a discipline where imagination is a core substance of contribution and any form of product is acceptable, a beginner may be exalted than a professional.
Nevertheless, there are also fields where a starter will not be able to make any contributions due to the required knowledge to make meaningful discoveries. As time passed the accumulation of human knowledge in the math, science and technology field have become grandiose. Also, these subjects depend strongly on logic, and a discovery will not be accepted if it contradicts with the existent facts. Therefore, without studying the precedent findings, it will be almost impossible to produce new findings. For instance, even Einstein had to learn basic physics of Newton and required help from his fellow mathematicians to finish his theory on special relativity, which presents a more comprehensive view of physics. All in all, however fresh a new perspective be, it might be useless if it doesn't fit to the original discoveries in some studies.
Finally, there are studies that require both the new perspective and knowledge. In a corporation, a novice manager might bring new wind into the business by implementing unprecedented marketing strategies because she isn't informed about the methods used in the real world. However, her strategy may be based on the knowledge acquired from MBA, and may be both innovative and effective. This is also the reason why sports teams with a poor performance change their managers: they hope a new manager, although not inexperienced, will bring new strategy and milieu into the team and promote the team's performance. All in all, there are some fields that require both the knowledge and imagination for success.
In conclusion, it would be sound to argue that different fields of inquiry require different levels of expertise: arts and music may benefit from the novice, science and technology will prefer the educated, and business and sports might want somebody in the middle.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 793, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...rspective be, it might be useless if it doesnt fit to the original discoveries in some...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 219, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...dented marketing strategies because she isnt informed about the methods used in the ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 594, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'teams'' or 'team's'?
Suggestion: teams'; team's
...nd milieu into the team and promote the teams performance. All in all, there are some...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, therefore, for instance, in conclusion, kind of, such as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 33.0505617978 64% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 58.6224719101 106% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2388.0 2235.4752809 107% => OK
No of words: 467.0 442.535393258 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11349036403 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64867537961 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02577246062 2.79657885939 108% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 215.323595506 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.52034261242 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 756.0 704.065955056 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.0501129484 60.3974514979 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.666666667 118.986275619 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.9444444444 23.4991977007 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.61111111111 5.21951772744 184% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0765804695894 0.243740707755 31% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0270975496983 0.0831039109588 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0263212375228 0.0758088955206 35% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0445028811402 0.150359130593 30% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0208011014812 0.0667264976115 31% => 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: 15.6 14.1392134831 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.0 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 100.480337079 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.