TOEFL integrated writing: communal online encyclopedia

The author states that traditional encyclopedias are a better source of information than the online ones and provides three reasons for support. However, the professor explains that the benefits of the online encyclopedias undermines those of traditional ones and refutes each of the authors' reasons.

Firstly, the readings say that there are many mistakes in the information present in the online encyclopedias due to the shortfalls in the academic knowledge of the contributors. The professor refutes this point by explaining that even traditional encyclopedias have errors in their content. Moreover, almost every piece of information present is somewhat fallacious. Also, unlike traditional encyclopedias, online encyclopedias can be corrected.

Secondly, the author posits that the are many chances of evil people to edit the content on the encyclopedias so as to present corrupt information or even delete some. However, the professor claims that people have taken security measurements to protect the content online. According to the professor, there are many special editors who have access to change and proof-read the content while for others it remains read-only format.

Thirdly, the reading claims that online encyclopedias have diverted the focus from the important historical and political issues towards more trivial ones. The professor opposes this point by saying that traditional encyclopedias have quite a limited pool of issues to discuss. She adds that the major advantage of online encyclopedias is their collection of a wide variety of topics and they are not limited, unlike the traditional ones.

Votes
Average: 7.6 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 34, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ed. Secondly, the author posits that the are many chances of evil people to edit the...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 111, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...o edit the content on the encyclopedias so as to present corrupt information or even del...
^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, moreover, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, while, as to

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

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1386.0 1373.03311258 101% => OK
No of words: 245.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.65714285714 5.08290768461 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95632099841 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06553166376 2.5805825403 119% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 145.348785872 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.534693877551 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 446.4 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.55342163355 116% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.3203099559 49.2860985944 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.5 110.228320801 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4166666667 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06452816374 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => 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: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.177964455901 0.272083759551 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0782291064609 0.0996497079465 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0540816576829 0.0662205650399 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122669626948 0.162205337803 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0551391199508 0.0443174109184 124% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 53.8541721854 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 11.0289183223 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.55 12.2367328918 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.14 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.2008830022 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.