Question :Summarise the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they case doubt on specific points made in the reading passage.
The main idea of the reading and the lecture are about the science of archaeology. The reading's point of view is the boundary in this science. The lecture refutes the passage's reasons with three examples.
First of all, the reading worries about artifacts that are destroyed at construction sites. The lecturer discredits this argument. Before construction, the sites must be tested to examine the value of archeology, as the lecture says. If the sites are valuable, the government and the constructor will make a plan to maintain them. This is one way the professor challenges the text.
Besides that, the author claims that the researchers who work in archaeology, have a wide range of financial problems. For instance, their funding depends on the government’s budget, or the source of research is very limited. The speaker rejects this notion; she thinks the researchers have been given paid a stream of funding because of their tests by companies since 1990. This is another way that she casts doubt on the text.
In the end, the article contends that opportunities for archeology job positions are rare because they are available only in university and governmental administration. Therefore, few scientists could able to work. On the hand, the listening opposes this line of thought. she adds up that scientists have had lots of job positions due to this new law since 1990. This rule obligates examination tests so companies need some archeology E.g. data processor, reporter, planner, and writer scientific manner. This is the final way the listening refutes the author's reason.
As mentioned, the writer and the speaker hold opposite sides.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 144, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...f view is the boundary in this science. The lecture refutes the passages reasons wi...
^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ssages reasons with three examples. First of all, the reading worries about ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...y the professor challenges the text. Besides that, the author claims that the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 388, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...of their tests by companies since 1990. This is another way that she casts doubt...
^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ay that she casts doubt on the text. In the end, the article contends that op...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 285, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...listening opposes this line of thought. she adds up that scientists have had lots o...
^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...istening refutes the authors reason. As mentioned, the writer and the speaker...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, e.g., first, if, so, therefore, for instance, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1399.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 268.0 270.72406181 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.22014925373 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04607285448 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83812504585 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.600746268657 0.540411800872 111% => OK
syllable_count: 415.8 419.366225166 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.4844291912 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 73.6315789474 110.228320801 67% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.1052631579 21.698381199 65% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.52631578947 7.06452816374 50% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0895584970013 0.272083759551 33% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0306258526519 0.0996497079465 31% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0439929338129 0.0662205650399 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.057868408727 0.162205337803 36% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0721389183836 0.0443174109184 163% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.2 13.3589403974 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 53.8541721854 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 11.0289183223 80% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.4 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 4.5 10.7273730684 42% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.