Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.
In any field, critical judgment of work done is indispensable because it helps in identifying and rectifying the mistakes and also aids in overcoming the drawbacks, which results in development and advancements. The given statement states that a critical assessment coming from an expert has more value than that from a novice. I agree with this statement because: an expert has more knowledge and experience than a rookie, an virtuoso has less probability of committing mistakes than a rookie, the judgment of a rookie might not be correct or precise because he/she might overlook some things unlike an expert.
Firstly, the word expert itself means an omniscient person. As an expert has great knowledge about the field and good experience in making judgments in the respective field. He judges the work correctly and objectively. Hence, his assessment has high value than a novice who might not have good experience and knowledge like an expert.
Secondly, an expert's probability of committing mistakes is less compared to that of a rookie. So, he can judge the work correctly and precisely. Hence, his evaluation has more value than that of a novice, who can commit mistakes unlike an expert.
Thirdly, as a rookie has less experience, he/she might overlook some important factors which might result in wrong assessment of work, whereas this is not the case for an expert, he might never overlook them, which helps him/her in judging the work correctly without leaving behind any vital things. This makes the judgment of an expert more valued.
Some argues that a novice sometimes has more talent than an expert and can judge the work more precisely than an expert. But, to invariably assess any work correctly one should have good experience along with the talent. To recapitulate, as an expert has good knowledge and experience and less probability in making mistakes, his judgment has more value than that of a rookie.
| 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 |
- Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student's field of study. 50
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities. 50
- Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news. During the same time period, most of the complaints we received from viewers were concerned with 25
- In any field of inquiry, the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important contributions. 50
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. has been updated. 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 425, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...knowledge and experience than a rookie, an virtuoso has less probability of commit...
^^
Line 5, column 14, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'experts'' or 'expert's'?
Suggestion: experts'; expert's
...owledge like an expert. Secondly, an experts probability of committing mistakes is l...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 236, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...a novice, who can commit mistakes unlike an expert. Thirdly, as a rookie has l...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, look, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 19.5258426966 20% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 58.6224719101 49% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1624.0 2235.4752809 73% => OK
No of words: 318.0 442.535393258 72% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.10691823899 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22286093782 4.55969084622 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71461433134 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 215.323595506 65% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.437106918239 0.4932671777 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 504.0 704.065955056 72% => 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
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => 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: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.6891561218 60.3974514979 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.266666667 118.986275619 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2 23.4991977007 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.93333333333 5.21951772744 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.334247893404 0.243740707755 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.137685055812 0.0831039109588 166% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0756487964622 0.0758088955206 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.21240778427 0.150359130593 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0744809854078 0.0667264976115 112% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.1392134831 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.71 8.38706741573 92% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 100.480337079 61% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 11.8971910112 160% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.