Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.
Critical judgment in the statement is basically telling which idea is valuable for specific studies or companies. In any type of field, there are experts who are highly intelligent in that field. Experts are experienced gourmet, and understand the value of given any idea at a first glance. On the other hand, there are people that didn’t learn any type of field, which is basically telling that they are not an expert. The statement discuss that when there are no experts in any type of field, then people couldn’t acquire pursued goals. However, the statement can be refuted by some reasons. Beginners or non-learners of any given field are versatile to learning more, and they have more flexible, they can imagine what people who can’t in any given field. Because of these reasons, they could be better than expert’s taste.
To begin with, beginners or non-learners of any given field have possibilities that they learn more. Beginners and non-learners are having a first step or intermediate learner of any field are going further studies, they are still immature to specific field, but they would be different when they are in a project. Eventually, they can be more versatile in work and more valuable at ideas. For example, in Seoul University, people who are in MS degree of computer science, are trying to make artificial armpit, it is their major job to make it efficient. However, the design is hideous to put on human and at that moment, there is student who was majoring in art but changed to computer sciences. He made artificial limb to better design which can comfit handicapped people.
Secondly, flexibility is one of the best way to learn studies and work. Beginners are not really intransigent to people who are oppose the ideas. Any type of field such as sociology, political sciences, psychologies have many different types of issues because of different aspects from observation. If group project is ongoing process, the beginners are trying to gather the information that would be related to specific issues and they would not expel the opposing ideas.
Conclusively, there is controversial debate that experts are experienced gourmet, they would understand that what exactly the value of work is and they would make value more marvelous. However, the mistakes come from smug. While some experts think themselves to go further ideas because they already accomplished the purpose, other people refute the ideas because of not enough supporting ideas. It would be deteriorated by the fact that experts are ornery with most people’s idea, it is not project with advocator but alone.
| 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 |
- Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws. 50
- The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things. 66
- The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries. 51
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 62
- The most effective way to understand contemporary culture is to analyze the trends of its youth. 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 440, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'discusses'.
Suggestion: discusses
...t they are not an expert. The statement discuss that when there are no experts in any t...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 776, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...gn which can comfit handicapped people. Secondly, flexibility is one of the best...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 121, Rule ID: WHO_NOUN[1]
Message: A noun should not follow "who". Try changing to a verb or maybe to 'who is a are'.
Suggestion: who is a are
...s are not really intransigent to people who are oppose the ideas. Any type of field suc...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 129, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'opposed'.
Suggestion: opposed
...t really intransigent to people who are oppose the ideas. Any type of field such as so...
^^^^^^
Line 6, column 222, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
..., political sciences, psychologies have many different types of issues because of different as...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, really, second, secondly, so, still, then, while, for example, such as, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 36.0 19.5258426966 184% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 11.3162921348 177% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 58.6224719101 85% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2211.0 2235.4752809 99% => OK
No of words: 431.0 442.535393258 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12993039443 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55637350225 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76382317967 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.45475638051 0.4932671777 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 697.5 704.065955056 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.740449438202 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.2638103478 60.3974514979 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.5 118.986275619 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5909090909 23.4991977007 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.86363636364 5.21951772744 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => 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: 0.288179649764 0.243740707755 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0926129040369 0.0831039109588 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0866609650961 0.0758088955206 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.169549068869 0.150359130593 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0936997969551 0.0667264976115 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.1392134831 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.17 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 100.480337079 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => 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: 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.