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.
Views differ when it comes to the issue whether it is useful to interrupt and correct the mistake made by the lecturer or keep it until the end of class, or even say nothing. I believe, however, correcting the meeting leader can improve people social interaction and bolsters them to get focused on the lecturer.
The first aspect of the current discussion is that people can improve their social interactions by correcting the speaker when they say something incorrect. People should be eligible to correct the mistakes which made by the lecturer since they can exchange and share ideas about the subject. In fact, they could challenge their knowledge by correcting each other. Take the case of an extremely introverted student. He cannot communicate with others since he is not able to prove himself in society properly as well. He can choose to do nothing and just see the scenario goes in the wrong way, but he shares his idea and might rescue the precarious situation of the speaker. Not only can he evaluate himself in socializing, but also he can help the meeting leader to correct the mistake which might be made unconsciously by him.
A further more subtle point is that people can concentrate better when they attend the discussion by correcting the lecturer. When people engage in the interrupting the lecturer, it positively impacts on both the lecturer's ability to speak and the listener's ability to listen. In fact, it is a kind of hint for the audience to listen carefully. Thus, the meeting would be more interesting for both of them, which means it is not boring for the addressee. In contrast, if you keep your point after the class you would lose your chance to show yourself as an appropriate individual who keeps focusing on the lecture. Besides, there is not enough time to challenge your leader to prove himself or herself mistakes. Although some people claim that it is a rude behavior to interrupt the speaker and might he lose his concentrations, this argument is not convincing. Moreover, our role as a listener is listening to the lecturer and even correcting him or her if he or she had a mistake.
To summarize, it should be emphasized that correcting the mistakes immediately evaluate our knowledge as well as we could perceive the lecture's main points. It is high time we stopped overlooking the fact that adequate speakers have started their meeting leaders by correcting the lecturer's mistakes.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 214, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lecturers'' or 'lecturer's'?
Suggestion: lecturers'; lecturer's
...urer, it positively impacts on both the lecturers ability to speak and the listeners abil...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 249, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'listeners'' or 'listener's'?
Suggestion: listeners'; listener's
... the lecturers ability to speak and the listeners ability to listen. In fact, it is a kin...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, however, if, look, moreover, so, thus, well, in contrast, in fact, kind of, as well as
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 : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 53.0 43.0788530466 123% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 45.0 52.1666666667 86% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.0752688172 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2029.0 1977.66487455 103% => OK
No of words: 413.0 407.700716846 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91283292978 4.8611393121 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72618580926 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 208.0 212.727598566 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.503631961259 0.524837075471 96% => OK
syllable_count: 629.1 618.680645161 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.5300062213 48.9658058833 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.789473684 100.406767564 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7368421053 20.6045352989 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.94736842105 5.45110844103 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88709677419 20% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.198661855583 0.236089414692 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0592380185211 0.076458572812 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0463790814094 0.0737576698707 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.133066892066 0.150856017488 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0350493617593 0.0645574589148 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 11.7677419355 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 58.1214874552 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.2 10.9000537634 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.89 8.01818996416 98% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 86.8835125448 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.002688172 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => 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.