Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
The topic raises a controversial issue that the judgment of a work has value only if it comes from someone who is a expert in that field. Indisputably, experts have more knowledge and are seasoned to the nuances of their fields of work and they are capable of using this experience to provide a better critical judgement of a work. Nevertheless, a judgement from an expert does not bring forth all the aspects of a work into consideration, aspects which would be of more relevance to nonspecialist. Thus, I would disagree that judgement of work only has value if it is done by an expert and would argue that judgement from all types of people can bring more value to the table.
First of all, in a type of work which is generally made for the broader audience, where everyone has the freedom to construe a meaning from the work, I would like to point out that, judgement from someone who is not a expert can put forth a viewpoint which represents the views of broader audience. For example, in case of movies, when the experts judge it, they will generally take all points in consideration for eg. the plot, direction, acting etc. While these judgements could be constructive to the director, it may not help the general audience. Similarly, a judgement from someone in the audience may judge that movie in the terms of how the movie was relatable for everyone. This judgement will bring a lot of value to the director and producer as well.
Admittedly, in some cases only the judgment from the expert will be of maximum value. Especially in cases such as scientific research, a person who is not expert in the field will not be able to critically judge the work and may provide inputs of little value. In addition, a expert of the field will be able provide constructive criticism of the work and could provide changes or suggestions that could further improve the work. However, the above arugment does not constitute enough evidence to generalize the statement that critical judgement of a work has little value if unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.
Hence, although in some cases only the expert in the field can provide valid judgement for a work, in most of the cases a judgement from people of various streams and walks of life will bring in more value that a judgment from an expert. As long as the further measurements in more specific areas are not made, the conclusion still stands.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-16 | Jeyodi123 | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-23 | Anil2044 | 50 | view |
| 2023-04-16 | AtharvaKale | 66 | view |
| 2023-02-21 | HSNDEK | 83 | view |
| 2022-08-07 | avidwriter1771 | 50 | view |
- Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the 66
- The following appeared in a memo to the board of the Grandview Symphony The city of Grandview has provided annual funding for the Grandview Symphony since the symphony s inception ten years ago Last year the symphony hired an internationally known conduct 58
- The following is part of a memorandum from the president of Humana University Last year the number of students who enrolled in online degree programs offered by nearby Omni University increased by 50 percent During the same year Omni showed a significant 63
- There is little justification for society to make extraordinary efforts especially at a great cost in money and jobs to save endangered animal or plant species Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statem 83
- The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine In 1975 a wildlife census found that there were seven species of amphibians in Xanadu National Park with abundant numbers of each species However in 2002 only four species of amphibians 55
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 115, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...ue only if it comes from someone who is a expert in that field. Indisputably, exp...
^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ple can bring more value to the table. First of all, in a type of work which i...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 32, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... table. First of all, in a type of work which is generally made for...
^^
Line 2, column 231, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...that, judgement from someone who is not a expert can put forth a viewpoint which ...
^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... to the director and producer as well. Admittedly, in some cases only the judgm...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 286, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...de inputs of little value. In addition, a expert of the field will be able provid...
^
Line 3, column 547, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...o generalize the statement that critical judgement of a work has little value if ...
^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...omeone who is an expert in that field. Hence, although in some cases only the e...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, hence, however, if, may, nevertheless, similarly, so, still, thus, well, while, for example, in addition, such as, first of all, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 58.6224719101 109% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 12.9106741573 194% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1994.0 2235.4752809 89% => OK
No of words: 429.0 442.535393258 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.64801864802 5.05705443957 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55107846309 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63097167278 2.79657885939 94% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 215.323595506 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.414918414918 0.4932671777 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 629.1 704.065955056 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => 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: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.552516169 60.3974514979 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.625 118.986275619 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.8125 23.4991977007 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.3125 5.21951772744 178% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 7.80617977528 102% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.30196163414 0.243740707755 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113810659422 0.0831039109588 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0925785995377 0.0758088955206 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.204084761165 0.150359130593 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0582142991979 0.0667264976115 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.1392134831 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 48.8420337079 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.99 12.1639044944 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.61 8.38706741573 91% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 100.480337079 73% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.