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.
The author’s statement portrayed that critical jugement of a certain field is only influencing it’s developemnt if it is provided by experts in that fields. This statement is not always true as it could be investigated through a set of evidences.
For instance, the critical judgment of fresh men in a certain field could be innovative, which in turns colaborate a proper development progress in that field. Maybe a perspective could be added or just noticed, by an only five to ten years experienced person in a field, about objective under concern lead to development of entire of the strategy adopted dealing with that subject.
In addition, sometimes review of recently innovated object by a committee including experts of different fields, field of that subject and it’s adjacent fields, result by recommendation that indeed bolster this innovated object and develop any minor flaws. Thus, this addressed statement is not valid regarding innovation and fields of study compatability that guarantee the best enhacement progress of any under concer fields.
For example, a committee of experts of different scientific basis is a must in order to challenge a recently reveal natural phenomena about earthquakes as an example. A committee of seismic experts as well as engineers of different fields and geological scienctists should be encountered in order to study the earthquakes prediction strategies and how to assuage earthquakes crisis and it’s accombined natural disasters. Thus, aids of not only experts in an intended fields of study are needed in order to guarantee the best developement progress of that given field.
These previously illustrated evidences are a sample of a set of evidences that endorse the importance of mid-level experts level and as well as experts of ajacent fields in addition to the experts of the field under concern in order to properly evaluate and develop a certain field of study.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...vestigated through a set of evidences. For instance, the critical judgment of f...
^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...egy adopted dealing with that subject. In addition, sometimes review of recentl...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t progress of any under concer fields. For example, a committee of experts of d...
^^^
Line 4, column 313, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'earthquakes'' or 'earthquake's'?
Suggestion: earthquakes'; earthquake's
...ld be encountered in order to study the earthquakes prediction strategies and how to assuag...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...lopement progress of that given field. These previously illustrated evidences a...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, may, regarding, so, thus, well, for example, for instance, in addition, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.5258426966 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 33.0505617978 54% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1640.0 2235.4752809 73% => OK
No of words: 308.0 442.535393258 70% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.32467532468 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18926351222 4.55969084622 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0406879875 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 215.323595506 70% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.487012987013 0.4932671777 99% => OK
syllable_count: 515.7 704.065955056 73% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 20.2370786517 49% => 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: 30.0 23.0359550562 130% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 59.5496431559 60.3974514979 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 164.0 118.986275619 138% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.8 23.4991977007 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.6 5.21951772744 165% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.189693708445 0.243740707755 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0835979454884 0.0831039109588 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0526513902478 0.0758088955206 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108382794189 0.150359130593 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0323953029625 0.0667264976115 49% => 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: 19.0 14.1392134831 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.57 48.8420337079 67% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 12.1743820225 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.17 12.1639044944 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.43 8.38706741573 112% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 100.480337079 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.2143820225 125% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => 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.