The way students and scholars interpret the materials they work with in their academic fields is more a matter of personality than of training. Different interpretations come about when people with different personalities look at exactly the same objects, facts, data or events and see different things.
Personality development of students and scholars play a vital role in their academic career as well as personal growth. Pragmatic student study academic with practical and experimental perspective while theotrical one fixate on thesis and theorems. It is all about having different tendancies and interpretation of same object due to different personalities.
Mostly personality is developed inherently in students and scholars. This developopment largly depends on environment in which they are brought up and how they are nurtured. Though at some level, training may be used to develop personality and reshape it, but is not useful to supercede with those who have inherently developed it. For an example, students are trained before getting into corporate as their pedantic personality is not compatible with the corporate work. Even after same training, each one differs from each other in terms of skills and still interpretation of work. Additionally, promotions is granted earlier to those whose personality are well in accordance to job as they do already possess understanding and perspective of every aspect, aparently have appropriate interpretation towards things.
Facts exists in world are not divided into boundaries such as physical, chemical and biological properties, students and scholars have made clear distinction between them in order to study them with different interpretaion. Chemistry student will study any body process with perspective of chemical acitivty whereas biology student with biological. Reason behind this, they have developed such personality
in order to advocate their field of study.
Many benefits are also available due to such distinct trait. Voting and survey are examples of such benefits. Though people uses same products and their regular exercises, survey shows different perspectives for the same. Similarly, voting is also based on publics' different interpretation of work done by candidate in past. Same work of candidate may ameliorate life for one and deteriorate life for other. These all have a common roots of their academic where they have developed different personalities and inherently have been using different interpretations.
Developed personality helps in each and every stage of life to interpret events and to learn from them. As everybody have a
different background, there is no doubt of having their different perspectives and interpretation of such event. Moreover, it is also widely accepted having different perspectives of every person towards same facts and proved useful ones.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 254, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[2]
Message: Did you mean 'anybody'?
Suggestion: anybody
...rpretaion. Chemistry student will study any body process with perspective of chemical ac...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 406, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...is, they have developed such personality in order to advocate their field of stud...
^^^
Line 8, column 317, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the past'?
Suggestion: in the past
...nterpretation of work done by candidate in past. Same work of candidate may ameliorate ...
^^^^^^^
Line 10, column 124, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... to learn from them. As everybody have a different background, there is no doubt ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, may, moreover, similarly, so, still, well, whereas, while, no doubt, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.4196629213 24% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 14.8657303371 135% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 11.3162921348 35% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2188.0 2235.4752809 98% => OK
No of words: 386.0 442.535393258 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.66839378238 5.05705443957 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43248042346 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10010439594 2.79657885939 111% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 215.323595506 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536269430052 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 710.1 704.065955056 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 0.0 4.99550561798 0% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.1017685178 60.3974514979 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.19047619 118.986275619 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.380952381 23.4991977007 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.90476190476 5.21951772744 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 4.97078651685 141% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.83258426966 228% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.380626309252 0.243740707755 156% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.116189231217 0.0831039109588 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0580194544394 0.0758088955206 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192904923505 0.150359130593 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0800283117046 0.0667264976115 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.1392134831 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.28 48.8420337079 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.61 12.1639044944 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.95 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.