Summarise the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they case doubt on specific points made in the reading passage.
Communal online encyclopedias represent one of the latest resources to be found on the Internet. They are in many respects like traditional printed encyclopedias collections of articles on various subjects. What is specific to these online encyclopedias, however, is that any Internet user can contribute a new article or make an editorial change in an existing one. As a result, the encyclopedia is authored by the whole community of Internet users. The idea might sound attractive, but the communal online encyclopedias have several important problems that make them much less valuable than traditional, printed encyclopedias.
First, contributors to a communal online encyclopedia often lack academic credentials, thereby making their contributions partially informed at best and downright inaccurate in many cases. Traditional encyclopedias are written by trained expertswho adhere to standards of academic rigor that nonspecialists cannot really achieve.
Second, even if the original entry in the online encyclopedia is correct, the communal nature of these online encyclopedias gives unscrupulous users and vandals or hackers the opportunity to fabricate, delete, and corrupt information in the encyclopedia. Once changes have been made to the original text, an unsuspecting user cannot tell the entry has been tampered with. None of this is possible with a traditional encyclopedia.
Third, the communal encyclopedias focus too frequently, and in too great a depth, on trivial and popular topics, which creates a false impression of what is important and what is not. A child doing research for a school project may discover that a major historical event receives as much attention in an online encyclopedia as, say, a single long-running television program. The traditional encyclopedia provides a considered view of what topics to include or exclude and contains a sense of proportion that online "democratic" communal encyclopedias do not.
The article states that communal online encyclopedias have several important problems that make them much less valuable than traditional, printed encyclopedias and provides three reasons for support. However, the professor explains that the communal online encyclopedias have come to a way to improve and it is ridiculous to think it as less valuable than the traditional one and refutes each of the author's reasons.
First, the reading claims that a communal online encyclopedia often lacks academic credentials, thereby making their contributions partially informed at best and downright inaccurate in many cases. However, the professor says that the traditional encyclopedias were not perfect at all. She states that the encyclopedias are in printed form and it remains for a decade without being corrected whereas, there is a good chance to correct the communal online one.
Second, the reading claims that even if the original entry in the online encyclopedia is correct, the communal nature of these online encyclopedias gives unscrupulous users and vandals or hackers the opportunity to fabricate, delete, and corrupt information in the encyclopedia. However, the professor refutes the point saying that there is always a provision in the online one to protect it from the malicious content. According to the professor, a crucial format present in the content in the article of the encyclopedias help to prevent malicious activity. Again, there is an editor in the process to find out what is going on the site. the traditional encyclopedias were not perfect at all.
Thirdly, the article posits that the communal encyclopedias focus too often, and in too great a depth, on trivial and popular topics, which creates a false impression of what is important and what is not. The professor opposes this point by explaining that it provides a range of information which can address the interest of diverse people. She states that traditional one has only a few specific information but, parochial. While the communal one reflects the interest of many people by providing diverse content in a detailed way.
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Young people nowadays do not give enough time to helping their communities.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 76
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Always telling the truth is the most important consideration in any relationship. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement The rules that societies today expect young people to follow and obey are too strict Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 71
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?If people have the opportunity to get a secure job, they should take it right away rather than wait for a job that would be more satisfying.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
- Many students choose to attend schools or universities outside their home countries. Why do some students study abroad? Use specific reasons and details to support your answer. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 641, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... to find out what is going on the site. the traditional encyclopedias were not p...
^^
Line 9, column 643, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...o find out what is going on the site. the traditional encyclopedias were not perf...
^^^
Line 13, column 427, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “While” 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.
...ew specific information but, parochial. While the communal one reflects the interest ...
^^^^^
Line 13, column 516, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a detailed way" with adverb for "detailed"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...any people by providing diverse content in a detailed way.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, so, third, thirdly, whereas, while, in many cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1790.0 1373.03311258 130% => OK
No of words: 334.0 270.72406181 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35928143713 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27500489853 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99343108137 2.5805825403 116% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.505988023952 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 569.7 419.366225166 136% => 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: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.9743198957 49.2860985944 126% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.857142857 110.228320801 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8571428571 21.698381199 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.85714285714 7.06452816374 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 4.33554083885 231% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.157246110272 0.272083759551 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0569737498015 0.0996497079465 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0319301993743 0.0662205650399 48% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101026882915 0.162205337803 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0185833572545 0.0443174109184 42% => 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: 15.7 13.3589403974 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 53.8541721854 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.1 12.2367328918 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 63.6247240618 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 10.7273730684 144% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.2008830022 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.