The reader claims three possible arguments relater to the obstacles that the Britain archaeologists in faced and provides reasons for supporting his evidence. On the other hand, the professor counters these specific points and presents clues to call into the information in the passage. He says the new rules and guidelines are adopted to improve the field of Archaeology, and all three claims in the passage are enhanced.
First, the reader concurs the lost of all interested artifacts due to the construction on the place without a plan. Conversely, the speaker casts doubt on this point by explaining that according to the new guidelines all the construction should examine by the Archeologist before it starts. And then if the expert finds something interesting and precious, this area will be surrounded or beginning of excavating. Furthermore, he says that all these processes made by the plan of the Archeologist and the builder and the government official.
Second, the reader states the financial support is not enough to finish the process of the Archeology, while the speaker encounters this by telling that the new guidelines set rules that all the operation of the plan included the examination and the preservation and the excavating are paid by the construction company. So, the fundings of the Archeology are increasing.
Third, the reader discusses the job opportunity is not easily gaining. However, the speaker addresses this by saying that all aspects of the work improve by the new guideline. So, the Expert has agrest chance to find jop in different stages of the excavating plan and this involves the examin, the drop, the perservation and doing, and printing the research project of that plan.
Essay evaluation report
should examine by the Archeologist
should be examined by the Archeologists
he says that all these processes made by the plan of the Archeologist and the builder and the government official.
he says that all these processes are made by the plan of the Archeologist and the builder and the government official.
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 22 in 30
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 12 12
No. of Words: 279 250
No. of Characters: 1409 1200
No. of Different Words: 149 150
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.087 4.2
Average Word Length: 5.05 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.843 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 103 80
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 81 60
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 58 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.25 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.91 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.833 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.358 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.589 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.098 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 4
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 34, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'arguments'' or 'argument's'?
Suggestion: arguments'; argument's
The reader claims three possible arguments relater to the obstacles that the Brita...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 315, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'finds'' or 'find's'?
Suggestion: finds'; find's
...efore it starts. And then if the expert finds something interesting and precious, thi...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 295, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ating plan and this involves the examin, the drop, the perservation and doing, an...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, first, furthermore, however, if, second, so, then, third, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1444.0 1373.03311258 105% => OK
No of words: 279.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17562724014 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08696624509 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91761115914 2.5805825403 113% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.530465949821 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 433.8 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.5920415665 49.2860985944 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.333333333 110.228320801 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.25 21.698381199 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.83333333333 7.06452816374 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.104756315767 0.272083759551 39% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0400097683502 0.0996497079465 40% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0230051728773 0.0662205650399 35% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0649180976871 0.162205337803 40% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.019662271484 0.0443174109184 44% => 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: 14.6 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 53.8541721854 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.91 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.