Encyclopedias
Both the reading and the lecture discuss about the online and the traditional encyclopedias. The reading states that online encyclopedias are the latest resources and the Internet user can add new articles and can make changes to the articles. But still, it is not efficient as the traditional encyclopedias and the reading passage provides three problems for that. However, the lecture refutes the belief presented in the reading passage by stating that online encyclopedias are efficient than the traditional encyclopedias.
To begin with, the passage claims that online articles are inaccurate. This is because the contributors of the online encyclopedias lack academic knowledge hence they insert inaccurate details. Also, the traditional encyclopedias are written by experts and do not contain any errors. Nevertheless, the lecturer contrasts this idea by pointing out that the traditional encyclopedias contain mistakes. Furthermore, she says that if there are errors in the printed or bounded encyclopedias then it is not possible to correct them but in online encyclopedias, the factual errors can be corrected.
Secondly, the reading mentions that the original article can be changed by anyone. As it has a communal nature, the hackers and vandals can make, cut, and corrupt the information. Yet, the lecturer challenges this argument by revealing that online encyclopedias are reliable. She states that the crucial information in the lecture can be put into the read-only format so no one can change it. Also, there are special editors, who make a change to the inserted information if it found to be malicious.
Lastly, the reading argues that the information in the online encyclopedias is trivial. Since it is in given in great depth and we cannot decide what is important. Whereas the traditional encyclopedias have considered view. On the other hand, the lecturer rebuts this point by explaining the concept of space available. She asserts that in the traditional encyclopedias there is limited space and it does not contain the articles of people's interest. However, online encyclopedias have unlimited space and hence contain a variety of articles of people's interest.
Thus, there is a stark difference between the reading and the lecture.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-16 | TiOluwani97 | 87 | view |
| 2023-07-18 | M. MEHRABI KERMANI | 80 | view |
| 2023-07-11 | keisham | 83 | view |
| 2023-07-11 | keisham | 83 | view |
| 2023-07-06 | nilav | view |
- The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine."Two studies of amphibians in Xanadu National Park confirm a significant decline in the numbers of amphibians. In 1975 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there 50
- settlement of the Chaco Canyon 56
- Life today is easier and more comfortable than it was when my grandparents were children 70
- DInosaurs are endotherms. 73
- The well-being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and s 82
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 13, column 165, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...and we cannot decide what is important. Whereas the traditional encyclopedias have cons...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, hence, however, if, lastly, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, still, then, thus, whereas, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 10.4613686534 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 7.30242825607 205% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1925.0 1373.03311258 140% => OK
No of words: 353.0 270.72406181 130% => OK
Chars per words: 5.45325779037 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33454660006 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09051523498 2.5805825403 120% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.478753541076 0.540411800872 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 614.7 419.366225166 147% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 13.0662251656 161% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.5690223891 49.2860985944 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.6666666667 110.228320801 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8095238095 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.04761904762 7.06452816374 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.333128534146 0.272083759551 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.1268718092 0.0996497079465 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.113837181773 0.0662205650399 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.190348235864 0.162205337803 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.131225192008 0.0443174109184 296% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.03 12.2367328918 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.32 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 63.6247240618 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.