The issue about critical judgment effectiveness and from whom it should came from is a controversial issue. I believe that any one is capable of giving critical judgment and it can be effective without being an expert in the field he is criticizing if he followed basic reasoning and objective rules while giving his criticism.
First, expressing opinions and criticizing others is a right for everyone, also it is the principal for improving and developing. And without it we would keep doing the same mistakes over and over. Thus critical judgment is a crucial part of every society, as everyone is prone to do mistakes even experts and professionals do mistakes. However the effectiveness of the critical judgment is not associated only with experts in that field, as we mentioned earlier that experts can do mistakes. Therefore everyone is responsible for giving critical judgment and it can be very effectiveness if the experts failed to recognize it and some non-expert notify them about their mistake.
Second to mention. People may say that critical judgment from inexpert people could be faulty and inaccurate. However this is not true for all cases, for instance if the person giving the criticism follows objects reasoning along with supporting evidence there is a high probability that he is giving a valuable opinion that need to be looked into it.
To conclude, critical judgment can be very effective even if inexpert people gave it for several reasons. Experts could sometimes go blindly about their the mistakes and there is a chance a non-expert person alert them about that mistake. Also if the one gives his criticism objectively supporting it with sufficient evidence, there is a high chance he is right about what he is saying.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 124, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'anyone'?
Suggestion: anyone
...s a controversial issue. I believe that any one is capable of giving critical judgment ...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 317, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ing and objective rules while giving his criticism. First, expressing opinions...
^^
Line 3, column 199, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... doing the same mistakes over and over. Thus critical judgment is a crucial part of ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 338, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
... experts and professionals do mistakes. However the effectiveness of the critical judgm...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 494, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...d earlier that experts can do mistakes. Therefore everyone is responsible for giving crit...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 111, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
... people could be faulty and inaccurate. However this is not true for all cases, for ins...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 240, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...t person alert them about that mistake. Also if the one gives his criticism objectiv...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'second', 'so', 'therefore', 'thus', 'while', 'for instance']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.187702265372 0.240241500013 78% => OK
Verbs: 0.190938511327 0.157235817809 121% => OK
Adjectives: 0.100323624595 0.0880659088768 114% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0582524271845 0.0497285424764 117% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0744336569579 0.0444667217837 167% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.126213592233 0.12292977631 103% => OK
Participles: 0.0614886731392 0.0406280797675 151% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.83234849729 2.79330140395 101% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0161812297735 0.030933414821 52% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.0016655270985 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0873786407767 0.0997080785238 88% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0291262135922 0.0249443105267 117% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00970873786408 0.0148568991511 65% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1756.0 2732.02544248 64% => OK
No of words: 289.0 452.878318584 64% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.07612456747 6.0361032391 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 4.58838876751 90% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.387543252595 0.366273622748 106% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.304498269896 0.280924506359 108% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.23875432526 0.200843997647 119% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.131487889273 0.132149295362 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83234849729 2.79330140395 101% => OK
Unique words: 141.0 219.290929204 64% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.487889273356 0.48968727796 100% => OK
Word variations: 47.5168867664 55.4138127331 86% => OK
How many sentences: 13.0 20.6194690265 63% => OK
Sentence length: 22.2307692308 23.380412469 95% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.9464147489 59.4972553346 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.076923077 141.124799967 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2307692308 23.380412469 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.923076923077 0.674092028746 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.94800884956 81% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.21349557522 134% => OK
Readability: 52.6805962204 51.4728631049 102% => OK
Elegance: 1.16 1.64882698954 70% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.24153256853 0.391690518653 62% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.119171961815 0.123202303941 97% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0878922730507 0.077325440228 114% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.547893568944 0.547984918172 100% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.166334939278 0.149214159877 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103894997304 0.161403998019 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0702971274632 0.0892212321368 79% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.373948074787 0.385218514788 97% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0382910332476 0.0692045440612 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.178990614858 0.275328986314 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0718290843797 0.0653680567796 110% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.4325221239 48% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.30420353982 132% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88274336283 20% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 5.0 7.22455752212 69% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 3.66592920354 109% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.70907079646 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 9.0 13.5995575221 66% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.