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? 1. Interrupt and correct the mistake right away; 2. Wait until the class or meeting is over and the people are gone, and then talk to the teacher or meeting leader; 3. Say nothing.
Communication is a big and important pillar of our society. We interact with each other on a variety of subjects to transfer and exchange ideas such as meetings, tutoring, or even powwowing. That is said, people have different opinions regarding the way we should behave in terms of addressing each other when we identify an error. Some would prefer to interrupt and correct the mistake immediately; others would disagree with the point of interruption and say that is better to wait for the right moment when the discussion is ended. Or even like others, who endorse the radical perspective which is not to utter a word. As far I am concerned, I support the first group for two essential reasons.
First of all, the interruption for correcting a mistake right away would help us to avoid misunderstanding and ambiguity. In order to follow the logical track of thoughts, we have to understand each step of the information provided. Therefore, it would keep the listeners focus without losing concentration because of a misleading or incorrect information. For example, when I was in high school, my math teacher made an error in formulating a differential equation. As soon as I noticed the mistake, I made an intervention to point out the problem because if I kept my silence not only my classmates would lose track of a good information and do not understand the lesson but also the teacher would enter in a mathematical loophole, which will be difficult to track back. As you can see, correcting a mistake immediately would be much beneficial for the whole gathering members.
Moreover, it could be a turn over in certain circumstances. Sometimes, minor mistakes could play a major role in affecting the outcome in meetings, business negotiations or company conventions...etc. It means that the small error that happened during a short time could have a repercussion on a long term. For instance, my uncle worked as a manager in a construction company. One day he told me how he lost his job because of a small mistake that he made during a contract negotiation with another company. Basically, my uncle made a numerical mistake when he established the mutual contract between the two companies. Instead of charging the other company with a certain amount of money that they both agreed on, the number he wrote was much less. The contract was signed by both parties and the damage is done. The thing is that my uncle could have avoided this mistake because his assistant reviewed the contract but he did not think that the contract would be signed in a very short time, so he decided to talk with his superior (my uncle) until their next meeting. This experience taught me that delaying to report a mistake is not a good idea because it could have an astronomical negative effect.
In sum, though some people may disagree with my reasoning, I believe the best way to correct a mistake is the immediate intervention. Not only because it will avoid misunderstanding but also it could have a crucial impact in certain circumstances. People should not be taking any formal error lightly and report it with dispatch.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, therefore, for example, for instance, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 9.8082437276 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 54.0 43.0788530466 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 56.0 52.1666666667 107% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.0752688172 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2591.0 1977.66487455 131% => OK
No of words: 531.0 407.700716846 130% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87947269303 4.8611393121 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80035803286 4.48103885553 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95895411185 2.67179642975 111% => OK
Unique words: 267.0 212.727598566 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.502824858757 0.524837075471 96% => OK
syllable_count: 814.5 618.680645161 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 9.59856630824 135% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.1326999172 48.9658058833 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.64 100.406767564 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.24 20.6045352989 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.44 5.45110844103 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 3.85842293907 337% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.127083228935 0.236089414692 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0318686760068 0.076458572812 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.042088001888 0.0737576698707 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0758076092989 0.150856017488 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0324778762502 0.0645574589148 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 11.7677419355 104% => 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: 11.02 10.9000537634 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.01818996416 100% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 86.8835125448 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => 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.