The article states that the online encylopedia is not perfect compare to traditional encyclopedia and the reading provides three reasons of support. However, the Professor in the lecture claims that the onlone encylopedia is more perfect than the traditional counterpart and provides three reasons of suppoert which refutes each of the reading's reason.
The article states that the online encylopedia is not perfect compare to traditional encyclopedia and the reading provides three reasons of support. However, the Professor in the lecture claims that the onlone encylopedia is more perfect than the traditional counterpart and provides three reasons of suppoert which refutes each of the reading's reason.
First, the reading posits that the online encylopedia contributors lack academic credential and this makes information from there imperfect. However, the Professor explains that the the online encylopedia contains comprehensive work which can not be found the traditonal counterpart. The prof. explains further that errors are forever in the tradition and these errors can not be corrected unlike the errors in the online.
Secondly, the reading claims that the online gives hackers the opportunity to fabricate and lie about the information they provide. The Prof. retutes this by saying that the traditional encylopedia is always in read only format and this gives room for stale and old stories. He explains furher that the online encylopedia gives room for improvement and additional information which is not possible the traditonal counterpart.
Thirdly, the reading expalins that the online encylopedia gives room for trivial and popular topics which create false impression of what is important and what is not. The prof. opposes this by explaining that traditinal encylopedia has limited space and they have to determine what is and what is not. He further explains that the diversity in the online encylopedia is one of its strong point.
- When people succeed it is because of hard work Luck has nothing to do with success Do you agree or disagree 70
- The article states that the decline of the sea otter is caused by environmental pollution and not by predators and the reading provides three reasons of support However the professor explains the decline is caused by predation and provides three reasons o 71
- Summarize the points made in the lecture 86
- The article states that the problems in the painting suggest that it could not be a work by Rembrant and provides three reasons of support However the professor in the lecture explains that the painting belongs to Rembrant and provides three reasons of su 60
- However in the lecture the man disagree with this develpoment and provides three reasons to refutes each of the reading reason 60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 178, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...t. However, the Professor explains that the the online encylopedia contains comprehensi...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 178, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...t. However, the Professor explains that the the online encylopedia contains comprehensi...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 294, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Explains
...d the traditonal counterpart. The prof. explains further that errors are forever in the ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 178, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Opposes
...is important and what is not. The prof. opposes this by explaining that traditinal ency...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 17.0 30.3222958057 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1356.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 248.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.46774193548 5.08290768461 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96837696647 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84066785467 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 116.0 145.348785872 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.467741935484 0.540411800872 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 423.9 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.2209629184 49.2860985944 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.272727273 110.228320801 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5454545455 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.18181818182 7.06452816374 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => 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: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.419208653065 0.272083759551 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.142594432217 0.0996497079465 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.198458904274 0.0662205650399 300% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.288310646475 0.162205337803 178% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.274785161578 0.0443174109184 620% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 13.3589403974 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 53.8541721854 76% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.0289183223 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.74 12.2367328918 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 10.7273730684 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 20.0 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.