TPO_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?
-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
There have been some moot points regarding our behavior toward a teacher or leader who has a wrong statement. The question of the best reaction has aroused as a subject of controversy among academicians. When it comes to my position, by weighing up the pros and the cons, I strongly subscribe to the point that I prefer to wait until the class or the meeting is finished then talk to teacher or meeting leader privately. I have some reasons the most outstanding of which will be explicated in the ensuing paragraphs.
The first reason worth discussing here is that everyone has his or her zeitgeist and social status, therefore, I should respect the teacher or leader situation and do not damage their position. To be more specific, it is not fair to correct their fault in front of other people because of their position drop due to this action. As a case to the point, I vividly remember, in my thesis defend meeting one of my referees stated an obvious idea about my result which gainsays my analysis. Thus this opinion leads to some negative point in my thesis. Due to this person was a high ranked professor in my field, I decided to accept his opinion and did not any reaction toward his wrong idea but after the meeting, I talked with my referee and corrected his fault. My personal experience competently corroborates to the point that it is better to correct other wrong ideas in the private place to maintain their position.
By the same token, another paramount reason to be mentioned here is that sometimes correcting teachers or leaders give rise to these persons feel, we want to degrade these persons. As a result, they act against us drastically. The corollary of this act brings about some conflicts. My personal example demonstrates this reality, I have a colleague named Mina. We have worked in a construction project as a supervisor. Two days ago I corrected her exotic mistake in front of our employer. After that, her behavior changed dramatically. She wanted to destroy my position and tried to clarify my foible. As a consequence, my action leads to her reaction. My personal example shed some light on the point that if I state her mistake in private I would prevent this conflict.
To wrap it up, according to the aforementioned reasons, I reiterate that, I vehemently prefer to correct everyone in the private not in front of other people. This action not only damages their position but also lead to some conflicts.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 487, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...t my result which gainsays my analysis. Thus this opinion leads to some negative poi...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, regarding, so, then, therefore, thus, as a result, by the same token
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 15.1003584229 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 9.8082437276 31% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 13.8261648746 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 68.0 43.0788530466 158% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 57.0 52.1666666667 109% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.0752688172 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2024.0 1977.66487455 102% => OK
No of words: 425.0 407.700716846 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.76235294118 4.8611393121 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54043259262 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71944834626 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 223.0 212.727598566 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.524705882353 0.524837075471 100% => OK
syllable_count: 639.9 618.680645161 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 20.0 9.59856630824 208% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.3201239668 48.9658058833 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.0 100.406767564 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3181818182 20.6045352989 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.09090909091 5.45110844103 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 11.8709677419 34% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 3.85842293907 285% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.88709677419 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.111934974908 0.236089414692 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.031051718214 0.076458572812 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0355755573447 0.0737576698707 48% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.072578225001 0.150856017488 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0473906610781 0.0645574589148 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 11.7677419355 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 58.1214874552 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.33 10.9000537634 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.29 8.01818996416 103% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 86.8835125448 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => 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: 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.