The author and the lecture hold a set of conflicting opinions about United Kingdom has a long and rich history of human settlement. According to the passage, it is the author's opinion that it has several merits, and provides three reasons to support it. However, the lecture states that it's dubious and skeptical, thus opposing each of the author's reasons.
First of all, the reading material suggest that several artifacts were lost in Britain due to the constriction projects. In contrast, the professor puts forth the idea that in 1919, they put guidelines to regulate constrictions. He states that before any constriction , the area have to be examine to make sure that the place preserve, examine and if they found any things value, the will build around it. Clearly a disparity exists between the article and the evidence exhibited by the professor. Hence, first the proposal is negated since it cannot explain why.
Second, the article pushes forth the idea that artifacts did not get support financially in united kingdom. However, the classroom discussion contends that by the excavator paid by constrict company. According to the professor, the artifact get support by the projects holder, and the government. Consequently, we can argue that indeed the claim made in reading is unsubstantiated.
As the last point to emphasize the reading claim, the author says it's difficult to find job in that field specially of the worker want to gets a hob in Britain, and the carries is so difficult to obtain. Conversely, the professor refutes this point by explaining that this field gets supports in so many branches, like from examine, Drawing preserver, processing the data and writing the reports. Therefore, climate fluctuations cannot explain this decline.
In summary, while both the reading and classroom discussion provides interesting information with regards to the artifact supports, a significant amount of evidence support that this field get support from project's holder and the government. Therefore, the reading passage fails to justify the claims.
- Some people think that human needs for farmland, housing, and industry are more important than saving land for endangered animals. 86
- Some people prefer to work for a large company. Other prefer to work for a small company. Which would you prefer? Use specific reasons and details to support your choice. 90
- TPO-01 - Integrated Writing Task In the United States, employees typically work five days a week for eight hours each day. However, many employees want to work a four-day week and are willing to accept less pay inorder to do so. A mandatory policy requiri 80
- Young people today are less dependent on their parents than in the past 90
- Is it better to enjoy your money when you earn it or it is better to save for some time in the future? 90
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 169, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...nt. According to the passage, it is the authors opinion that it has several merits, and...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 268, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
.... He states that before any constriction , the area have to be examine to make sur...
^^
Line 5, column 261, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'projects'' or 'project's'?
Suggestion: projects'; project's
...fessor, the artifact get support by the projects holder, and the government. Consequentl...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, conversely, first, hence, however, if, second, so, therefore, thus, while, in contrast, in summary, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1748.0 1373.03311258 127% => OK
No of words: 330.0 270.72406181 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29696969697 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26214759535 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80756832852 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 145.348785872 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.554545454545 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 522.0 419.366225166 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.181270904 49.2860985944 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.823529412 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4117647059 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.41176470588 7.06452816374 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.115286676273 0.272083759551 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0334775395653 0.0996497079465 34% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0324233137938 0.0662205650399 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0617073319292 0.162205337803 38% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0100757618234 0.0443174109184 23% => 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: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.46 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.79 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 63.6247240618 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.