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, many classes and meetings are held worldwide, and people with different levels of knowledge attend these sessions. Making a mistake in any of these sessions and classes is inevitable, and the lecturer might make careless mistakes. The crucial matter is how the audiences should behave in such a circumstance. While some people assert that it is essential to correct the instructor or speaker immediately, others believe otherwise and think it is better to discuss the presenter after the meeting privately. There is a third group that prefers to ignore everything and say nothing. I strongly support the second group for two main reasons, which I will explain in the following paragraphs.
To begin with, it is crystal clear that everybody should behave politely and respect others in each situation. Interrupting someone’s speech and pointing out the mistake right away is impolite. Consider a teacher as an example. If he makes a mistake during the teaching of an important concept, and one of the students realizes it and corrects him immediately, the teacher might feel embarrassed in front of other students and consequently lose his self-esteem. However, if the student waits until the end of the session and talks to the instructor about the error privately, he shows his respect and politeness to his teacher and helps the teacher fix the problem in an appropriate way in the next session. On the other hand, if the student does not notify his teacher about the mistake, it will lead to students misunderstanding and it might cause serious problems in their exams.
Furthermore, another equally remarkable point is that sometimes an audience thinks that something is incorrect. While the person is wrong, and the lecturer talks correctly. In this situation, disrupting an individual’s lecture will waste others’ time and mentally harm the presenter, especially when focusing on the presentation. Because the speaker might lose his concentration entirely, and it will lead to a poor presentation. For instance, last month, I attended a meeting that my friend, who is a professional speaker, gave a speech. During his presentation, one of the audience was asking silly questions and tried to correct my friend even though the person herself made mistakes and my friend was presenting flawlessly. The person interrupted the speech many times, and it was apparent that this matter affected the presenter’s confidence. I believe that no one could not take advantage of the presentation, and it was wasting time because we only saw the struggle between two people. After the presentation, my friend confessed that it was his worst presentation because he could not concentrate on the material due to that person’s disruption.
By taking into account all the above reasons, I believe that when a person makes a mistake in the classroom or meeting, it is logical to notify the lecturer after the session privately than interrupting the speech at the moment or ignoring the mistake entirely and saying nothing. Not only is this more polite and respectful behavior toward the teacher or meeting leader, but also helps them focus on their presentation.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 666, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an appropriate way" with adverb for "appropriate"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...r and helps the teacher fix the problem in an appropriate way in the next session. On the other hand,...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...cause serious problems in their exams. Furthermore, another equally remarkable ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, furthermore, however, if, second, so, third, while, for instance, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 15.1003584229 126% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 29.0 13.8261648746 210% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.0286738351 136% => OK
Pronoun: 52.0 43.0788530466 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 49.0 52.1666666667 94% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.0752688172 198% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2670.0 1977.66487455 135% => OK
No of words: 512.0 407.700716846 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21484375 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75682846001 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95188401401 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 264.0 212.727598566 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.515625 0.524837075471 98% => OK
syllable_count: 812.7 618.680645161 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.51792114695 199% => OK
Conjunction: 8.0 1.86738351254 428% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.0191525827 48.9658058833 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.086956522 100.406767564 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2608695652 20.6045352989 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.34782608696 5.45110844103 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 3.85842293907 285% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.174728325345 0.236089414692 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.046262950898 0.076458572812 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.041672984802 0.0737576698707 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112104497256 0.150856017488 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0417834202581 0.0645574589148 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 11.7677419355 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 58.1214874552 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 10.9000537634 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 86.8835125448 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => 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: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.