Independent 43: 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 class or meeting is over and the people are gone, and then talk to the teacher or meeting leader; 3. say nothing.
While some people believe that whenever one audience finds that teacher or lecturer is making mistake should declare his fault to does not mislead others, there are quite a few numbers of people who say it is not convincing. To my way of thinking, waiting for finishing the class or speech and after that speaking to the teacher or lecturer about the issue is more appropriate action because not only is not humiliated his personality, but also it is probable that he does not accept his fault in front of others.
The first reason which should be stated here is that interrupting one’s presentation, makes him to miss his confidence. I think, if in the middle of speaking of one person someone asserts that the speaker is making a mistake, he loses his confidence about the issue and maybe this affects his rest of speech, and worse maybe it influences his future position. Since, if some of his supervisors be in his presentation, cannot trust to his knowledge, or for example, if the teacher making one trifle mistake and one of the students corrects his fault, other students think the teacher’s information is not reliable, so they cannot trust his tutoring in other aspects. Moreover, when one person interferes in the teacher's speaking suddenly, he loses his concentration, so might he forget one part of the lesson to discuss to the students. As a result, if one finds that the speaker is making a mistake, it is proper to wait until finishing the speech to cause the speaker continues his presentation with confidence.
Another point worth discussing here is that I believe that if in front of other students, it is said to the teacher that you are making a mistake probably he defends from his claim. As I mentioned in the last paragraph, because of the sequences of accepting the making mistake in front of either other students or audience, who is presenting a topic, probably does not admit his mistake, even though he understands that he is making a mistake. Therefore, he pretends that he is telling the truth and proving his claim in a false manner, yet after the presentation, if someone tells him the truth and providing convincing reasons, definitely he accepts, so in a next class or lecture, he will correct his mistakes. Furthermore, by discussing the mistake within the time of presentation, audience’s time is wasted. As a result, convincing someone after the speaking increases the possibility of accepting the fault.
To summarize, as I mentioned, there are lots of reasons like, causing someone to lose his confidence and reducing the possibility of accepting the truth, which is shown that telling the mistake of speaker to him after finishing the speech is more convenient approach.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 519, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a false manner" with adverb for "false"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...telling the truth and proving his claim in a false manner, yet after the presentation, if someone...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, if, may, moreover, so, therefore, while, for example, i think, speaking of, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 15.1003584229 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 9.8082437276 61% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.0286738351 163% => OK
Pronoun: 59.0 43.0788530466 137% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 50.0 52.1666666667 96% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.0752688172 173% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2277.0 1977.66487455 115% => OK
No of words: 461.0 407.700716846 113% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93926247289 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63367139033 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86582584577 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 212.727598566 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.440347071584 0.524837075471 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 704.7 618.680645161 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 13.0 3.51792114695 370% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 20.6003584229 63% => 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: 35.0 20.1344086022 174% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 68.5269350577 48.9658058833 140% => OK
Chars per sentence: 175.153846154 100.406767564 174% => OK
Words per sentence: 35.4615384615 20.6045352989 172% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.07692307692 5.45110844103 167% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.88709677419 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0707818048166 0.236089414692 30% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0336108764588 0.076458572812 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0215240405522 0.0737576698707 29% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0499344983959 0.150856017488 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00782758905213 0.0645574589148 12% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.6 11.7677419355 167% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.41 58.1214874552 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 10.1575268817 156% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 10.9000537634 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.01818996416 107% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 86.8835125448 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 10.002688172 180% => OK
gunning_fog: 16.0 10.0537634409 159% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.247311828 156% => 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.