There are different opinions on how people should react when teachers or meeting leaders make mistakes during their presentations. Despite the fact that some people think that it is better to interrupt teachers' or meeting leaders' speeches and correct their mistakes immediately or say nothing at all, I believe otherwise, maintaining that those audience conceiving those mistakes have to wait until the end of the meeting and talk to teachers or meeting leaders about their faults in personal. In what follows, I will delve into the most persuasive reasons to substantiate my perspective.
Without a doubt, the most consequential reason corroborating my stance on this subject is that interrupting people while they are speaking is neither moral nor decent. People usually prepare their speeches beforehand and put much effort into preparing themselves to give fluent speeches. They arrange their lecture chronologically, which means that they have already specified what to say in each time step of their speech. Making mistakes during a live lecture is inevitable; people may make some mistakes unintentionally because of stress or high pressure during the speech. However, the audience does not have the right to interrupt lecturers and devastate their concentration. The audience should respect teachers' or meeting leaders' endeavors and wait until the end of the meeting and then share their opinions with them.
Although the previous reason is the first one crossing the mind at first glance, another remarkable point deserving some words here is that, in some cases, lecturers do not have adequate knowledge, and they may not notice that they have had a mistake. If the audience interrupted teachers' or meeting leaders' speeches and notified them about their mistakes, they would feel embarrassed. This situation would deteriorate if lecturers did not have enough information to correct themselves at the moment. Therefore, people presenting the session can speak to teachers or meeting leaders at the end of the session. In this way, lecturers have time to study more about the subject and explain their mistakes or misunderstandings in the next meeting.
All in all, many people are in favor of correcting other people immediately, or they prefer to say nothing at all. Nonetheless, the foregoing reasons lead us to conclude that people should have some patience and notify lecturers about their mistakes at the end of the session; this is because, in this way, lecturers would not lose their concentration and have time to do some research about their mistakes.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 340, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this audience' or 'those audiences'?
Suggestion: this audience; those audiences
..., I believe otherwise, maintaining that those audience conceiving those mistakes have to wait ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, may, nonetheless, so, then, therefore, while, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 15.1003584229 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 13.8261648746 159% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 43.0788530466 104% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 52.1666666667 100% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2171.0 1977.66487455 110% => OK
No of words: 408.0 407.700716846 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32107843137 4.8611393121 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49433085973 4.48103885553 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8397958306 2.67179642975 106% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 212.727598566 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.480392156863 0.524837075471 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 656.1 618.680645161 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.6003584229 78% => 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: 25.0 20.1344086022 124% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 73.3476045536 48.9658058833 150% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.6875 100.406767564 135% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5 20.6045352989 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.9375 5.45110844103 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 11.8709677419 25% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.211164757374 0.236089414692 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.085717897168 0.076458572812 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0979297713799 0.0737576698707 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156634281205 0.150856017488 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0966301279812 0.0645574589148 150% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 11.7677419355 139% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 58.1214874552 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 10.1575268817 128% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 10.9000537634 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.01 8.01818996416 100% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 86.8835125448 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.002688172 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.0537634409 119% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.247311828 137% => 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: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.