Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.
It seems obvious that expert, having more knowledge in any particular field, are more accurate in giving critical judgement to any work than a layman. However, a deeper analysis of the claim might paint a different picture: the expert (though have abundant knowledge) may be biased, may possess fault-finding attitude or may not be able to represent overall public sentiment of any work making their critical judgement virtually of lesser value.
Firstly, experts in any field have their own views and field of specialization or may have propensity for certain task while having negative attitude towards others, and when they judge any work against this background, their judgement is destined to be biased. In politics, for example, people have their own view and belief, and when any politician judge any work they judge with their lens of belief. Liberals, for example, would criticize the increment in tax though the increment is beneficial to distribute income proportionately. On the other hand, conservatives might judge decrements in tax (that liberal think as beneficial) as pernicious to business and society as a whole as such increment would decrease the incentive to start new business.
In addition to bias attitude, most experts tend to have fault-finding attitude, and even when they don't have this attitude they somehow can detect smaller fault and end up criticizing about this fault rather than praising the work's positive aspect. Painting of Monalisa, one of the most famous work of art in the history, for instance, is loved by most of the people. However, there are several expert-review of the art in the internet that criticize the art for the minor fault that it possesses. Would the judgement that emphasize only faults be of value rather than the one that points out positive aspects of it? obviously not. Valuable judgments are only those that highlight the better part of work while also admonishing about its darker aspects.
Thus, when a layman sees a piece of work he/she judges the work without any lenses of biaseness; he/she judges the work solely based on the worth of the work and also without fault-finding attitude. Moreover, a layman is more representative than the experts as they represent any work in line with general public sentiment (as most of the people are not experts). So, it is always better to judge a piece of work by general people than any experts.
| 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 |
- A movie producer sent the following memo to the head of the movie studio.“We need to increase the funding for the movie Working Title by 10% in order to ensure a quality product. As you know, we are working with a first-time director, whose only previou 85
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 50
- In order to become well-rounded individuals, all college students should be required to take courses in which they read poetry, novels, mythology, and other types of imaginative literature. 79
- Claim: Any piece of information referred to as a fact should be mistrusted, since it may well be proven false in the future.Reason: Much of the information that people assume is factual actually turns out to be inaccurate. 83
- On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 256, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...picture: the expert though have abundant knowledge may be biased, may possess fau...
^^
Line 1, column 377, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...to represent overall public sentiment of any work making their critical judgement...
^^
Line 3, column 377, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...any politician judge any work they judge with their lens of belief. Liberals, for...
^^
Line 5, column 100, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...lt-finding attitude, and even when they dont have this attitude they somehow can det...
^^^^
Line 5, column 618, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Obviously
...that points out positive aspects of it? obviously not. Valuable judgments are only those...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 660, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...viously not. Valuable judgments are only those that highlight the better part of ...
^^
Line 7, column 299, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...as they represent any work in line with general public sentiment as most of the people are not...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, moreover, so, thus, while, for example, for instance, in addition, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 58.6224719101 84% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2008.0 2235.4752809 90% => OK
No of words: 398.0 442.535393258 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04522613065 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46653527281 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70250046249 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 215.323595506 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.482412060302 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 633.6 704.065955056 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 28.0 23.0359550562 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 70.4674550571 60.3974514979 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.428571429 118.986275619 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.4285714286 23.4991977007 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.21428571429 5.21951772744 177% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 7.80617977528 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
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: 0.203633965505 0.243740707755 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0721564219115 0.0831039109588 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.056317434559 0.0758088955206 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131434148971 0.150359130593 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0284303463008 0.0667264976115 43% => 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: 16.6 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 48.8420337079 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.31 12.1639044944 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 100.480337079 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 11.8971910112 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.2143820225 118% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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: 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.