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 leade.
•Say nothing.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
In every classroom or meeting, the teacher or meeting leader has a pivotal factor in guiding people's mind, and everyone relies on them. Sometimes, teachers or meeting leaders state some points or ideas that we might think are not valid and accurate. Some people wait until the end of class and clarify the point, and some say nothing. As far as I am concerned, I believe that people should interrupt and correct the seeming mistake immediately. The reasons why I think so will be elaborated upon hereunder.
First, this mistake may lead to a wrong conclusion, and not only ourselves but also others in the class or meeting might get the wrong information. Inaccurate data can mislead the whole class and cause some misunderstanding. To explain more, if we wait until the end of the class, where no one is there, and go to clarify the point, maybe we can correct the statement, but others may not know about it. Moreover, If we choose to say nothing, we cannot correct the statement. The teacher or meeting leader will repeat the mistake every time in the same situation.
Second, there is a chance that what the teacher or meeting leader is discussing be correct, and we mistakenly think it is wrong. In this case, we have to clarify as soon as possible. Because if we wait until the end of the class or meeting, we will be confused throughout the session and cannot understand the following points and conclusions. Also, if we never mention the point, we may never learn about it correctly. My own example illustrates this reality. A few years ago, when I was in university, my Static professor talked about a significant physics rule, and it's application in Civil Engineering. As I was listening and taking notes, I realized that he was wrong. It contradicted with my knowledge about the subject. I wanted to say nothing, But I realized that he was making crucial points based on that rule. So, I raised my hand and questioned the rule. He kindly explained to me, and then I realized that I did not clearly understand the rule before. If I did not ask, I would never be able to learn thoroughly in that course, which was fundamental in Civil Engineering.
In conclusion, with all this taken into account, I strongly believe that people should abruptly interrupt the class or meeting if they realized something problematic in the speaker's statements. By doing so, they can help others to learn more accurately. Moreover, if they were wrong, they can know instantly and do not get confused.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-14 | Zmx_6 | 76 | view |
| 2023-07-12 | Zmx_6 | 80 | view |
| 2023-06-28 | Vivian Chang | 70 | view |
| 2023-03-22 | sonyeoso | 76 | view |
| 2023-02-20 | m.ghoroobi | 76 | view |
- TPO 54 Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Governments should spend more money in support of the arts than in support of athletics such as state sponsored Olympic teams Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 70
- TPO 56 80
- TOEFL T P O 44 Integrated Writing Task 3
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement In the past it was easier to identify what type of career or job would lead to a secure successful future Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 70
- TPO 42 Integrated Writing Task 90
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, moreover, second, so, then, i think, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 9.8082437276 173% => OK
Conjunction : 28.0 13.8261648746 203% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.0286738351 109% => OK
Pronoun: 57.0 43.0788530466 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 52.1666666667 75% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.0752688172 74% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2062.0 1977.66487455 104% => OK
No of words: 434.0 407.700716846 106% => OK
Chars per words: 4.75115207373 4.8611393121 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56428161445 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72257814913 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 211.0 212.727598566 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.486175115207 0.524837075471 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 637.2 618.680645161 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 17.0 9.59856630824 177% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 3.51792114695 256% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 9.0 1.86738351254 482% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.7047910917 48.9658058833 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.48 100.406767564 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.36 20.6045352989 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.08 5.45110844103 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 11.8709677419 34% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 3.85842293907 285% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.88709677419 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.223399533788 0.236089414692 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0596938008486 0.076458572812 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0643447174351 0.0737576698707 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150942413691 0.150856017488 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0596441323238 0.0645574589148 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.6 11.7677419355 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 58.1214874552 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.1575268817 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.97 10.9000537634 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.61 8.01818996416 95% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 86.8835125448 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => 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: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.