Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.
The writer of the issue states that just an expert on the specific field should give critical judgment about work on that field. As far as I concern and based on my past experiences, I should say that this claim is true because I believe fair and true judgment always is from an expert. First, an expert is someone who has expertise in a specific field. Usually, this person is the one has devoted his study on that field in addition he has experience about it. As a result, if we want a fair, meticulous and thorough judgment we need to ask such a person. Because this judgment comes from knowledge and expert we can consider it as a valuable arbitration. To give an example, let me explain a similar situation in my work. As a user interface designer I always should share my designs to a superior for evaluation. Because the user interface is a field need research and study in principle of design and people behaviour if someone who has knowledge in this field and is familiar with human behaviour and attitude evaluates my work it can lead to better design and a successful business. A second brief is that someone who is not an expert on a field usually judges a work based on his interest and manner. And because his view is based on things than the principle of work his judgment cannot be true. This judgment includes false feedbacks that can be misleading and has an irreparable effect on that work. Remember what I mentioned above about my work. Consider if someone with no expertise in this field tries to evaluate my work. Because his critics about my work are not based on research and principle, and it is usually based on self-taste about the subject it can be misleading and leads to a product with bad design, unhappy customer and obviously a failure of the business. However, some may believe that judgments from not expert people are good because it consists of the opinions of ordinary people about a field or subject which in some way can be useful but I must say that in most cases this attitude not only is not true but also can be destructive. Consequently, to my way of thinking, it is a very good opinion if we ask expert persons to judge about work in a specific field. This can give us true feedback that can be useful to improve our work also can be reliable judgements.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-26 | jinjer | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-19 | jason123 | 83 | view |
| 2020-01-11 | __annabelle__ | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-19 | cnegus | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-18 | ken10091995 | 50 | view |
- 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 sign 59
- Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field. 50
- Governments officials should rely on their own judgment rather than unquestioningly carry out the will of the people they serve. 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 166, Rule ID: PAST_EXPERIENCE_MEMORY[1]
Message: Use simply 'experiences'.
Suggestion: experiences
...ld. As far as I concern and based on my past experiences, I should say that this claim is true b...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, however, if, may, second, so, in addition, as a result, in most cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 52.0 33.0505617978 157% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 50.0 58.6224719101 85% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1882.0 2235.4752809 84% => OK
No of words: 419.0 442.535393258 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.49164677804 5.05705443957 89% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52432199235 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54820858209 2.79657885939 91% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 215.323595506 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.415274463007 0.4932671777 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 606.6 704.065955056 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59117977528 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.9143660142 60.3974514979 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.555555556 118.986275619 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2777777778 23.4991977007 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.61111111111 5.21951772744 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 1.0 4.97078651685 20% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.314661691392 0.243740707755 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.12844809955 0.0831039109588 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101619981058 0.0758088955206 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.314661691392 0.150359130593 209% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0667264976115 0% => 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: 11.4 14.1392134831 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 65.05 48.8420337079 133% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.06 12.1639044944 74% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.68 8.38706741573 92% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 100.480337079 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.