Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.
The value of a work in any field gets noticed when it is given a good judgment. The judgment made by the experts gives a lot of value to the work. This is because people always tend to hear experts in their fields and agree with them. The judgment made by an expert increases a work’s value by making it known to more people who also increase its value. I agree with the author’s point as a good judgment by an expert makes the work valid and reachable to many people.
People always tend to listen to experts and believe their judgment. This is because experts have good knowledge over their field. Experts go through work in depth than other people and give a final verdict. Let us take an example of Smartbizz an online phone reviewer. If there is any new release in the phone market people always try to search for his review. People wait till his review is out and then decide upon buying that mobile. If the Smartbizz does not release any review on the mobile, People make a conclusion that the phone is not worth buying. But if the Smartbizz gives a good judgment of a phone, the sales of the phone gets increased thereby creating a better value for the phone. The increase in sales is only because the reviewer always goes through every detail in a phone. The reviewer gives a good judgment of a phone only if it’s really worthy.
The judgment made by an expert not only gives it value but also makes the work known to many people that increases the value of work indirectly. Let us take an example of a conference given by scientist Stephen Hawking. In 2003 when Stephen Hawking was giving a conference he referred to a paper for explaining his theory. After this conference, people checked out the paper which hawking was referring to and praised the paper for its work. Though the paper was published in 1997 and was praised before, it was known widely to many people only when it was referred by Stephen Hawking’s conference. By being referred in an expert’s conference the value of the work was increased by making the work known to many people which increased the value of the work indirectly.
In conclusion, the expert’s judgment to a work adds a lot of value to work when compared to a judgment made by a person who is not an expert. Experts have a lot of knowledge on their field and their judgment can be treated as a validity a work.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...one only if it's really worthy. The judgment made by an expert not only giv...
^^^
Line 5, column 50, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'values'?
Suggestion: values
...ent made by an expert not only gives it value but also makes the work known to many p...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 780, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eased the value of the work indirectly. In conclusion, the expert's judgmen...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, really, so, then, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 12.4196629213 8% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 33.0505617978 82% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 58.6224719101 102% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1963.0 2235.4752809 88% => OK
No of words: 432.0 442.535393258 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.54398148148 5.05705443957 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55901411391 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47671663702 2.79657885939 89% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 215.323595506 75% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.372685185185 0.4932671777 76% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 612.0 704.065955056 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59117977528 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.7106810972 60.3974514979 54% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 85.347826087 118.986275619 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7826086957 23.4991977007 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.0 5.21951772744 38% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => 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: 0.29675104048 0.243740707755 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112919995762 0.0831039109588 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0985608521089 0.0758088955206 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.23956054807 0.150359130593 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.108561124542 0.0667264976115 163% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.3 14.1392134831 66% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 70.13 48.8420337079 144% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 12.1743820225 65% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.05 12.1639044944 74% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.8 8.38706741573 81% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 100.480337079 62% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.7820224719 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 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: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.