TPO 49- Independent writingDo you agree or disagree with the following statement?The ability to maintain friendships with a small number of people over a long period of time is more important for happiness than the ability to make many new friends easily.

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 320, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... their low-level of knowledge of history .' In this regard, a heated debate w...
^^
Line 3, column 120, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...ing their political and social knowledge . Indeed, people need to be acquainted wi...
^^
Line 3, column 882, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n their desired homeland in the future. Admittedly, human beings like to find th...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 624, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[4]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'thorough knowledge'.
Suggestion: thorough knowledge
...his problems, but also he could provide a thorough knowledge for the next generations to further kno...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 841, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ld help them to value their traditions. To put it briefly, weighing the merits a...
^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, briefly, but, consequently, first, furthermore, hence, if, lastly, moreover, so, thus, well, at least, for instance, in addition, for one thing, with respect to

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 9.8082437276 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.0286738351 45% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 50.0 43.0788530466 116% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 52.1666666667 140% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2551.0 1977.66487455 129% => OK
No of words: 476.0 407.700716846 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35924369748 4.8611393121 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67091256922 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87072300847 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 256.0 212.727598566 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.53781512605 0.524837075471 102% => OK
syllable_count: 795.6 618.680645161 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.6301881824 48.9658058833 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.476190476 100.406767564 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6666666667 20.6045352989 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.90476190476 5.45110844103 145% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.5376344086 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => 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: 0.0721050430146 0.236089414692 31% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0249315848455 0.076458572812 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0266942142755 0.0737576698707 36% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0470433471904 0.150856017488 31% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0195608898657 0.0645574589148 30% => 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: 15.2 11.7677419355 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 58.1214874552 70% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.1575268817 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.1 10.9000537634 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.14 8.01818996416 114% => OK
difficult_words: 133.0 86.8835125448 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 10.002688172 155% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.247311828 156% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
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.