By and large, it is established beyond doubt that makes a mistake is an inevitable part of an individual’s life, which should be managed through different ways. A glance at how people react to other’s errors brings to light a question as to whether in a classroom or a meeting, they should correct the lecturer’s error during, or end of the class, or even ignore it. Among significant divergence of attitudes towards this controversial issue, I personally believe that the best way of reaction toward this situation is that wait until the lecture is over, and then at the end of the session talk to the lecturer. I will completely elaborate on two outstanding reasons in the following paragraphs.
The first exquisite point worth mentioning is that the highly valuable time of a class or meeting should be allocated to cover a great deal of information, not to debate on the mistake of the teacher or meeting leader. Audience prefers to get more information from their teacher or lecturer rather than talk about a little information which conveys incorrectly in the class or meeting. In addition, the point that is incorrect in my opinion may be correct from others’ point of view and it is my mistake! Therefore, it does not make sense that others’ valuable time allocate to my misunderstanding, and it is better to wait until the end of the class or session to discuss that confusing point and do not waste the time of the other listeners.
Another point that I want to put forward is that one who interrupts speaker seems to be impolite and rude. He or she can behave in a more politely manner by the end of the session and when the audience is not present. From the psychological point of view, people often do not like being questioned in the front of others. Conversely, they prefer to know about their mistakes in private. Although it indicates the precise view of a passionate listener, it also shows disrespect toward lecturer. The later demerit outweighs the point mentioned early. Indeed, there are a large number of situations to show listener’s enthusiasm, actually, in this case, at the end of the time of the class or meeting.
In summary, taking all the aforementioned into account, talking about teacher or meeting leader’s error at the end of the class or meeting not only can save more valuable time of class to focus more on the presentation, but also can seems as a polite manner that listener does not interrupt session and indicate individual’s passion for the lecture presented by the lecturer. Therefore, I strongly prefer to postpone state points mentioning incorrectly to the end of the class.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 246, Rule ID: WHETHER[6]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "as to"?
Suggestion: whether
...pos;s errors brings to light a question as to whether in a classroom or a meeting, they shoul...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 568, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...oint mentioned early. Indeed, there are a large number of situations to show listener's enth...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 239, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[2]
Message: The verb 'can' requires the base form of the verb: 'seem'
Suggestion: seem
... more on the presentation, but also can seems as a polite manner that listener does n...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, conversely, first, if, may, so, then, therefore, thus, as to, in addition, in summary, talking about, by and large, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 13.8261648746 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.0286738351 127% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 43.0788530466 77% => OK
Preposition: 75.0 52.1666666667 144% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.0752688172 136% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2221.0 1977.66487455 112% => OK
No of words: 451.0 407.700716846 111% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92461197339 4.8611393121 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60833598836 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02498514869 2.67179642975 113% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 212.727598566 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.492239467849 0.524837075471 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 695.7 618.680645161 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.86738351254 268% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => 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: 28.0 20.1344086022 139% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 96.2443991877 48.9658058833 197% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.8125 100.406767564 138% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.1875 20.6045352989 137% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.375 5.45110844103 172% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 11.8709677419 67% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => 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: 0.125038649054 0.236089414692 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0394011443845 0.076458572812 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0305051194879 0.0737576698707 41% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0796866735781 0.150856017488 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0321915977659 0.0645574589148 50% => 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: 15.8 11.7677419355 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 58.1214874552 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 10.1575268817 128% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 10.9000537634 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 86.8835125448 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 10.002688172 200% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.0537634409 131% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => 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.