Imagine that you are in a classroom or a meeting. The teacher or the meeting leader says something incorrect. In your opinion, which of the following is the best thing to do?
-Interrupt and correct the mistake right away
-Wait until the class or meeting is over and the people are gone, and then talk to the teacher or meeting leader
-Say nothing
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
Nowadays, teaching some students or be a leader of a group are crucial duties in a society. So, teachers or leaders should be careful when they do their tasks. But, there may be a few mistakes during teaching or conducting people as a group leader. Someone prefers to cease the lecture and correct it right away, and some other people do not say anything. However, I would rather act with another procedure instead of the first two solutions. In what follows, I will substantiate my viewpoint.
Firstly, teachers might say something wrong that they did not deliberately do that. So, we can correct their mistakes in a polite way. It results in their personality being preserved. For example, I was a student at a university. I had physics every Monday morning. One day, my teacher was solving an equation about the material's acceleration. But, she forgot to write the weight force of the substances. After class over, I went to his room at the university and told her about his mistake. She appreciated me because I did politely. Thus, if I interrupted the class, it would cause negative consequences for her.
Secondly, correcting teachers' mistakes after class does not bring about negative results for students. Someone thinks if they do not warn the teacher about his errors, it will result in misunderstanding of students. In recent years, most of the classmates have group channel on the internet, or they have chatrooms connected them and their teachers. If a teacher tells something incorrect in the class, they can remember his wrongs, and after he solves it, they can share the correct one. Therefore, this can be compensated in this method, and the teacher's mistake cannot affect the misunderstanding of students.
To conclude, when a teacher or a meeting leader say something wrong, we can warn them about their mistakes after the class or meeting is over, and not only this cause to save their personalities among people, but their mistakes also can be compensated.
- Imagine that you are in a classroom or a meeting. The teacher or the meeting leader says something incorrect. In your opinion, which of the following is the best thing to do?-Interrupt and correct the mistake right away-Wait until the class or meeting is 60
- agnostids, marine animal, Free-Swimming Predators, Seafloor Dwellers, Parasites 68
- Mars, Earth, hydroponic, water, dangerous level, send human 85
- bee, Arizona, fossilize, actual bees fossils, flowering plant, chambers 81
- Mars, Moon, Scientist, radiation, zero-gravity environment, water, food, hydroponic, shielded, many months 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 118, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a polite way" with adverb for "polite"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...that. So, we can correct their mistakes in a polite way. It results in their personality being ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 320, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'materials'' or 'material's'?
Suggestion: materials'; material's
...acher was solving an equation about the materials acceleration. But, she forgot to write ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 15.1003584229 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 9.8082437276 143% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 13.8261648746 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 11.0286738351 36% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 46.0 43.0788530466 107% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 52.1666666667 69% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.0752688172 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1650.0 1977.66487455 83% => OK
No of words: 333.0 407.700716846 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.95495495495 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.48103885553 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83129837437 2.67179642975 106% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 212.727598566 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.546546546547 0.524837075471 104% => OK
syllable_count: 501.3 618.680645161 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 9.59856630824 167% => OK
Article: 0.0 3.08781362007 0% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.86738351254 321% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.1344086022 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.9544555345 48.9658058833 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 75.0 100.406767564 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.1363636364 20.6045352989 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.31818181818 5.45110844103 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.88709677419 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.21306765703 0.236089414692 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0544321770609 0.076458572812 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0559721431399 0.0737576698707 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.137008600698 0.150856017488 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0302401935376 0.0645574589148 47% => 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: 9.5 11.7677419355 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 58.1214874552 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 10.1575268817 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.84 10.9000537634 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.65 8.01818996416 95% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 86.8835125448 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.002688172 60% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.0537634409 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.247311828 78% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.