Imagine that you are in a classroom or a meeting. The teacher or the meeting leader says something incorrect. In your opinion, which of the following is the best thing to do?
— Interrupt and correct the mistake right away.
— Wait until the class or meeting is over and the people are gone, and then talk to the teacher or meeting leader.
— Say nothing.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
It has at least once occurred to all of us when we are in a classroom or in a meeting and the lecturer makes a mistake in his speech. Whether should I interrupt and correct the mistake promptly or not is the controversial question that usually comes to mind in these situations, and of course it’s a complicated one. Personally, I believe we should consider many issues in order to make the right decision, some of which I'm going to elaborate hereunder.
In many cases, the lecturer only mispronounces a single word or makes an obvious mistake in giving facts, mistakes that are inherent in giving lectures and mostly happen involuntarily as a result of stress. But, as most of the audience are aware that this has been an unintentional misstatement, it does not result in any misconception. I think in these cases the mistake can be overlooked, mainly because correcting can disturb and also embarrass the lecturer. I remember when once the US president, Trump mispronounced the appellation of another country's leader and no one corrected him. It was unnecessary and it could damage the president's prestige.
In some traditions, it is a widely held axiom that it is rude to correct a respected person talking. However, there are some cases that the lecturer is giving wrong information or providing convincing arguments which seem reasonable, but you know it is flawed and it can mislead a multitude of people listening to it. I remember once a student in our high school class asked the teacher about the location of "Atlas Mountains". After some hesitation, he answered; "maybe in the Atlas ocean", an answer which I knew was wrong, and corrected instantly. If I hadn't corrected the teacher, the whole class would have learned a wrong fact. On the other hand, in some cases such as an election or in a company meeting, astute lecturers who have a yen for power and profit, tend to use fallacious facts that help turn the people's vote in their favor. I think in these cases it is our moral responsibility to interrupt and correct the speech.
According to the aforementioned reasons, there isn't a strict determining rule or criterion for deciding in such a situation. First, we have to consider the consequences of the mistake and our reaction, and then decide what to do. Anyway, being too rude or rash coping with such a situation is not recommended and we should keep it in mind that nobody is infallible.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 427, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: I'm
... make the right decision, some of which Im going to elaborate hereunder. In m...
^^
Line 9, column 577, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: hadn't
...as wrong, and corrected instantly. If I hadnt corrected the teacher, the whole class ...
^^^^^
Line 13, column 48, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...ng to the aforementioned reasons, there isnt a strict determining rule or criterion ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, anyway, but, first, however, if, look, may, so, then, at least, i think, of course, such as, you know, as a result, in many cases, in some cases, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 13.8261648746 159% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 43.0788530466 104% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 52.1666666667 84% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.0752688172 149% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2038.0 1977.66487455 103% => OK
No of words: 416.0 407.700716846 102% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89903846154 4.8611393121 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51620172871 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00618718334 2.67179642975 113% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 212.727598566 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550480769231 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 648.9 618.680645161 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.4516064347 48.9658058833 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.222222222 100.406767564 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1111111111 20.6045352989 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.38888888889 5.45110844103 172% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 11.8709677419 17% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 3.85842293907 311% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.152535224617 0.236089414692 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0437036869548 0.076458572812 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0317246949805 0.0737576698707 43% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0821413490676 0.150856017488 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0390468420353 0.0645574589148 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 11.7677419355 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 58.1214874552 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.44 10.9000537634 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 86.8835125448 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.002688172 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.