The reading and lecture both discuss the effect of buying the fossils by privte collectors. While the reading states three disadvantges of having the privte buyers to these fossils, the professor refutes by saying, none of these claims are conviencing.
Firstly, the reading states that the community will sufer becuase there is no fossils they can see at the museum. As a result their intrest in fossils will decrease by time. On the other hand, the professor argues this notion by saying that fossils will have great exposure dut to the puplic commercial. So, many fossils will be there for purchase. As a result, people intrest will increase to contain fossil.
In addition, the article avers that many scientists will lose connection to these fossil because the prive collectors will by the fossils with high price. So, the scientists cannot compete with them. Nevertheless, the professor questions this idea by pointing out scientists will not going to lose any prcious fossils. This is because these fossils will be handled by scientists to do exmaniations and tests before the privte owners have it. As a result, the scientists will not miss anything.
Lastly, the article mentions that the scientits will miss important evidence related to these fossils because the privte buyers untrained. However, the professor refutes this notion by saying many fossils could not be discovered. In addition, many institutions could not have many fossil without these privte owners. So, it is much better for institutions and scientists to ger more fossils through these buyer otherwise many fossils will be hidden.
- TPO-10 - Integrated Writing Task 78
- TPO 41 - integrated writing 60
- TPO 31 - Integrated Writing Task 73
- TPO 40 Integrated Writing Task 63
- TPO-22 - Integrated Writing Task Ethanol fuel, made from plants such as corn and sugar cane, has been advocated by some people as an alternative to gasoline in the United States. However, many critics argue that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasol 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 67, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'there are no fossils'?
Suggestion: there are no fossils
...s that the community will sufer becuase there is no fossils they can see at the museum. As a result...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 115, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” 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.
... no fossils they can see at the museum. As a result their intrest in fossils will ...
^^
Line 5, column 77, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this fossil' or 'these fossils'?
Suggestion: this fossil; these fossils
...many scientists will lose connection to these fossil because the prive collectors will by th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 285, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'go'
Suggestion: go
...dea by pointing out scientists will not going to lose any prcious fossils. This is be...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 277, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun fossil seems to be countable; consider using: 'many fossils'.
Suggestion: many fossils
...ition, many institutions could not have many fossil without these privte owners. So, it is ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 400, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this buyer' or 'these buyers'?
Suggestion: this buyer; these buyers
... scientists to ger more fossils through these buyer otherwise many fossils will be hidden.
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, lastly, nevertheless, so, while, in addition, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 15.1003584229 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 9.8082437276 163% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 13.8261648746 22% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 11.0286738351 36% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 43.0788530466 46% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 52.1666666667 58% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 4.0 8.0752688172 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1359.0 1977.66487455 69% => OK
No of words: 260.0 407.700716846 64% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.22692307692 4.8611393121 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 4.48103885553 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57092010329 2.67179642975 96% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 212.727598566 62% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.503846153846 0.524837075471 96% => OK
syllable_count: 397.8 618.680645161 64% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 9.59856630824 21% => OK
Article: 10.0 3.08781362007 324% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => 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: 16.0 20.1344086022 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.0196803478 48.9658058833 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.9375 100.406767564 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.25 20.6045352989 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.3125 5.45110844103 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.5376344086 108% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.0138037181479 0.236089414692 6% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.00663538764184 0.076458572812 9% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0120747954753 0.0737576698707 16% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.00877479273794 0.150856017488 6% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0106694296988 0.0645574589148 17% => 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: 11.3 11.7677419355 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 58.1214874552 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 10.1575268817 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 10.9000537634 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.89 8.01818996416 98% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 86.8835125448 66% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.002688172 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.0537634409 84% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.247311828 78% => 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.