e reading and lecture both discuss if the coins that found in native america is a genuine or not. While the reading provides three claims to support that these coins are a genuine, the professor refutes, saying that none of these claims are convincing.
Firstly, the reading avers that the long distance between native american and Canada where the coins were located ensure that these coins are fake. However, the professor argues this notion by saying that these coins could not be fake because there are many objects found in north America came from long distance. So, these coins might be came from Canada. In addition, the native american traveled for long distance and they were interested in many objects. Furthermore, they brought many objects back with them.
In addition, the article shows that they did not find any other coins at Canadian site that inhibited by the Norse. So, these coins could not be a genuine. On the other hand, the professor argues this idea by pointing out that it was not necessary to find another objects to confirm that these coins were real. This is because the Norse did not stay permanent and they took these coins back with them. In fact, The Norse brought the coins to native American and when they back to Europe the took it with them.
Lastly, the reading mentions that the Norse thought that these coins were not important. So, they could not know that these coins used as money. Nevertheless, the professor rejects this idea by explaining that many Norse people were attracted to many objects, In addition, these coins were very nice and they were look like jewelers. As a result, Norse used these coins to trade with Europe.
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Young people nowadays do not give enough time to helping their communities.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
- TPO-50 - Integrated Writing Task 3
- TOEFL TPO 40 - Integrated Writing Task 73
- TPO-30 - Integrated Writing Task 75
- TPO-02 - Integrated Writing Task In many organizations, perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team. Having a team of people attack a project offers several advantages. First of all, a group of people 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: E
e reading and lecture both discuss if the...
^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ought many objects back with them. In addition, the article shows that they...
^^^
Line 7, column 146, Rule ID: DT_JJ_NO_NOUN[1]
Message: Probably a noun is missing in this part of the sentence.
...the Norse. So, these coins could not be a genuine. On the other hand, the professor argue...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, lastly, look, nevertheless, so, while, in addition, in fact, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 9.8082437276 41% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 13.8261648746 51% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 43.0788530466 97% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 52.1666666667 58% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 6.0 8.0752688172 74% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1396.0 1977.66487455 71% => OK
No of words: 289.0 407.700716846 71% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.83044982699 4.8611393121 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 4.48103885553 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.1358536156 2.67179642975 80% => OK
Unique words: 129.0 212.727598566 61% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.446366782007 0.524837075471 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 427.5 618.680645161 69% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Article: 9.0 3.08781362007 291% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.6003584229 78% => 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: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.7147661456 48.9658058833 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.25 100.406767564 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0625 20.6045352989 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.3125 5.45110844103 152% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 11.8709677419 34% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
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: 0.031412687583 0.236089414692 13% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0171525113769 0.076458572812 22% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0233780807084 0.0737576698707 32% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0217565973135 0.150856017488 14% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0189857223379 0.0645574589148 29% => 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: 10.3 11.7677419355 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 58.1214874552 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.1575268817 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.44 10.9000537634 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.26 8.01818996416 91% => OK
difficult_words: 50.0 86.8835125448 58% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
We are expecting: No. of Words: 350 while No. of Different Words: 200
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.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.