Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
According to the author critical judgment for any work should come from someone who is expert in that particuler field. Since, before judging any work a strong understanding of that particuler field is required I partly agree with the author’s claim.
Any work no matter how good it is will always receive criticism from few people which might not be valuable. Few people might be criticising the work for personal reasons. For instance, A scientist must have done good job in studying a particuler phenomenon but still few reserchers will try to criticize the work. Their criticism will be based on the jealousy they have. There will always be few people who would hate us and will to try to find faults in our work. If we give importance to these feedbacks we will be wasting our valuable time.
Furthermore, To judge a particuler work its imperative that they have a good knowledge of that field. Experts in that field will give most valuable feedback since they have a strong understanding of the field. For Instance, Sachin Tendulkar a renowned cricketer, can easily identify the mistakes a young cricketer might be dong and can easily help him overcome those mistakes. Similarly, any work contains lot of things that can only be understood by the experts of that field.
However, I concede that sometimes critical judgment from non expert might also be helpful. They might lack the understanding of the field but sometimes their naive view towards the work may help us find the fault. For instance, Many times experienced film directors produces bad films, its through public reactions and their feedbaks they get to know were did they went wrong. Public might not be an expert in film directing but still they are able to find faults which the directors missed.
In conclusion, I agree with author that one should consider judgment that comes from an expert in that field espicially if its field of science or maths since they require great understanding of the field. However, in other areas feedback from non expert might also be helpful.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 121, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...who is expert in that particuler field. Since, before judging any work a strong under...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 467, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...will to try to find faults in our work. If we give importance to these feedbacks w...
^^
Line 5, column 241, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...he field. For Instance, Sachin Tendulkar a renowned cricketer, can easily identif...
^^
Line 9, column 225, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'areas'' or 'area's'?
Suggestion: areas'; area's
...tanding of the field. However, in other areas feedback from non expert might also be ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, if, may, similarly, so, still, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.4196629213 177% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 33.0505617978 115% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 58.6224719101 63% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1716.0 2235.4752809 77% => OK
No of words: 348.0 442.535393258 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.93103448276 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31911543099 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57358991326 2.79657885939 92% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 215.323595506 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.488505747126 0.4932671777 99% => OK
syllable_count: 507.6 704.065955056 72% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.447452896 60.3974514979 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.3333333333 118.986275619 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3333333333 23.4991977007 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.05555555556 5.21951772744 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.237092674316 0.243740707755 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0925258762287 0.0831039109588 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.083314266938 0.0758088955206 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.169302585354 0.150359130593 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0855810323691 0.0667264976115 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 14.1392134831 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.8420337079 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 12.1639044944 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.53 8.38706741573 90% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 100.480337079 65% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.