In any field of inquiry, the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important contributions.
A significant contribution in any community is more often than not accomplished by professional and experienced individuals through their extensive knowledge and experience in their field. While some people are exempt such as those who discover something serendipitously, experts are those who make contributions most of the times.
One simple reason is that a professional has deep knowledge and experience in their area of work through years of practicing, systematic work, and studying. A university professor, for example, is more likely to be “professed” in her field than a tyro. In essence, because being a professor requires to have major contributions throughout a person’s career. This is provided that the professor is uptodate and has made the effort to regulary keep her knowledge current. Otherwise, an outdated teacher is not likely to have contributed something, if at all. An amateur does not have the thorough understanding of their field and does not have the necessary experience to incorporate their superficial knowledge. Some beginners do make important advancements, but it is most likely by chance. Thus, an expert is more likely to make major contributions.
In addition, making worthy contributions requires the person to have ways finance their practice, especially in the field of science. A beginner, even with a complete understanding of their area of interest, will not be able to take steps to achieve something and add to the existing knowledge and techniques. For example, a talented biology student with vast information in this area might have a theory, but to test it, she need lab expensive equipments, chemical agents, etc. So she will not be able to test this hypothesis, even if it would be of major importance when worked on. Therefore, a tyro is less likely to make any improvements in their area of study. Even if it is cheap or free of charge to do research, including other areas that do not require laboratory work, the hypothetical accomplishment is not recognized as important. This is because her colleugues do not recognize this researcher. An individual needs to be affiliated with an expert person or organization. Otherwise, he or she could be easily discarded or overlooked of any contribution at all.
In summary, it is the professionals who make noteworthy contributions in most cases, not beginners. A valuable contribution by an amateur is a mere coincidence.
- Scientific theories, which most people consider as 'fact,' almost invariably prove to be inaccurate. Thus, one should look upon any information described as 'factual' with skepticism since it may well be proven false in the future. 50
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 54
- An ailing patient should have easy access to his or her doctor’s record of treating similarly afflicted patients. Through gaining such access, the ailing patient may better determine whether the doctor is competent to treat that medical condition. 75
- The following appeared as part of a petition sent to residents of Youngtown by an environmental protection group:"The Smith Corporation should not be permitted to develop the land that is now part of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve. This sanctuary is esse 50
- Governments should offer college and university education free of charge to all students. 58
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, look, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, in addition, in summary, such as, in most cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 58.6224719101 84% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2051.0 2235.4752809 92% => OK
No of words: 389.0 442.535393258 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.27249357326 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44106776838 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.40093403698 2.79657885939 122% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.503856041131 0.4932671777 102% => OK
syllable_count: 668.7 704.065955056 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 11.0 4.99550561798 220% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.5610874368 60.3974514979 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.6666666667 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5238095238 23.4991977007 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.90476190476 5.21951772744 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.83258426966 207% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.231047047745 0.243740707755 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0741780929549 0.0831039109588 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0966431564938 0.0758088955206 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136449226404 0.150359130593 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0767680806221 0.0667264976115 115% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.1392134831 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 100.480337079 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.8971910112 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 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: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.