magine 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 leader, Say nothing
It is always a hard to communicate efficiently and politely at the same time. At school, students often encounter a situation which they are confused at professor's erroneous points but not knowing how to raise the question appropriately. This happens in meetings as well. When your boss is saying something that you think is wrong, it is difficult to ask for clarification without annoying him. It is highly debated what would be the best thing to do when facing the dilemma, interrupting and correcting the mistake right away, seeking clarification to the speaker privately afterwards, or doing nothing. In my opinion, talking to the speaker afterwards when the meeting is over is the best choice.
Clarifying the confusing points directly to the speaker is beneficial to both you and the speaker. As a starter, the speaker may provide the reasoning behind his/her words thus you can gain perspective and knowledge that you once overlook. Furthermore, if the speaker recognizes his/her mistake, your move help him/her correct the errors and make better content for the next time. For example, when I was once in a strategic management class, the professor talked about specialized strategy. The definition is completely different from what I had learned before. Therefore, I went to my professor and asked for further clarity. She explained the difference of the usage of 'specialized' in strategic management and marketing in details and I learned a lot from her explanation.
However, some may claim validity of the argument that speaking up during the meeting or the class can help all audience to learn the reasoning behind the speaker's words and perhaps ensuring the audience have better chance learning the right thing. At first glance, the argument seems to be plausible, but further reflection reveals that it leaves out several significant factors that need to be addressed to substantiate its stance. It is hard to know people's real personalities as well as their tempers. Randomly interrupting a meeting or a lecture may regard as a rude behavior for some people. Besides, you may bring awkward and embarrassing moments to the speaker. Thus, it is risky to simply interrupt in the middle of the talk.Therefore, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited above doesn’t lend strong support to what they claim.
To sum up, it is better to wait until the meeting or the class dismisses and then ask the speaker for explanation since it can not only give you a chance to learn the reasoning behind the confusing points and help the speaker reinforce his/her content, but also ensure the act is polite enough. Of course, there may be some people who disagree with my point of view on this matter, however, I believe the reasons I have provided in favor of my point of view are stronger.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 734, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Therefore
...ply interrupt in the middle of the talk.Therefore, the conclusion lacks credibility becau...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, furthermore, however, if, look, may, so, then, therefore, thus, well, for example, of course, as well as, in my opinion, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 15.1003584229 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 13.8261648746 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 43.0788530466 111% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 52.1666666667 109% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.0752688172 198% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2355.0 1977.66487455 119% => OK
No of words: 467.0 407.700716846 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04282655246 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64867537961 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84949484799 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 253.0 212.727598566 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.541755888651 0.524837075471 103% => OK
syllable_count: 720.0 618.680645161 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 9.59856630824 125% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.9194512253 48.9658058833 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.142857143 100.406767564 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2380952381 20.6045352989 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.47619047619 5.45110844103 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
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: 0.187263495191 0.236089414692 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0514651739993 0.076458572812 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.056626737965 0.0737576698707 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117051657154 0.150856017488 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.07655008757 0.0645574589148 119% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 11.7677419355 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 58.1214874552 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 10.9000537634 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.01818996416 107% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 86.8835125448 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => 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: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.