The United Kingdom (sometimes referred to as Britain) has a long and rich history of human settlement. Traces of buildings, tools, and art can be found from periods going back many thousands of years: from the Stone Age, through the Bronze Age, the Iron Age, the time of the Roman colonization, the Middle Ages, up to the beginnings of the industrial age. Yet for most of the twentieth century, the science of archaeology,dedicated to uncovering and studying old cultural artifacts,was faced with serious problems and limitations in Britain.
First, many valuable artifacts were lost to construction projects. The growth of Britain's population, especially from the 1950s on, spurred a lot of new construction in British cities, towns, and villages. While digging foundations for new buildings, the builders often uncovered archaeologically valuable sites.Usually, however, they proceeded with the construction and did not preserve the artifacts. Many archaeologically precious artifacts were therefore destroyed.
-Second, many archaeologists felt that the financial support for archaeological research was inadequate. For most of the twentieth century, archaeology was funded mostly through government funds and grants, which allowed archaeologists to investigate a handful of the most important sites but which left hundreds of other interesting projects without support. Furthermore, changing government priorities brought about periodic reductions in funding.
-Third, it was difficult to have a career in archaeology. Archaeology jobs were to be found at universities or with a few government agencies, but there were never many positions available. Many people who wanted to become archaeologists ended up pursuing other careers and contributing to archaeological research only as unpaid amateurs.
Listening
In 1990, new rules and guidelines were adopted in United Kingdom and that had changed the whole feel of Archaeology in that country. The new guidelines improved the situation in all 3 areas discussed in the passage. First, the new guidelines state that before any construction project can start, the construction site has to be examined by archaeologists to see whether
the site is of archaeological interest or value. If the site is of archaeological interest, the next step is for the builders, archaeologists and local government officials to get together and make a plan for preserving the archaeological artifacts, either by building around them or by excavating a document in them properly before the construction is allowed to proceed.
Second, an important part of new guidelines is the rule that any archaeological work done on the construction site will be paid for by the construction company not by the government. The construction company has to pay for the initial examination of the site, and then for all the work carried out under the preservation plan. This is whole new source of financial support. The funding from the construction company has allowed researchers to study a far great range of
archaeological sites than they could in past. Last, the new guidelines provide a lot of paid work for archaeologists, work that didn’t exist before. Expert archaeologists are now hired all stage of the process to examine the site for archaeological value, then have to drop the preservation plan to do the researcher and professional scientific manner and finally to process the data and write reports and articles. The increased job career opportunities in Archaeology have increased the number professional archaeologists in Britain which is now the highest it’s ever been.
The article states that the most cultural artifact is endangered by serious problems and limitations in Britain and issues three reasons of support in contrast, the professor makes clear that since 1990 new role in Britain changes play toward archaeological ground and renounce each of author's reasons.
First, the reading claims that precious artifacts were destroyed by new construction in British cities, towns, and villages and uncovered archaeologically artifacts are not preserved. Conversely, the professor refutes this points by imparting that new role pressure the local government to establish a place near artifacts which found newly. He assert that before the construction begin to work local government send archaeologists to site if the artifacts not found, the local government permit to company to start the project.
In addition, the passage posits that financial archaeological research budget is inadequate and mostly funds and grant thorough government, this little budget makes many site without surveying. However, the speaker says that due to new role in local government company have to pay initial examination on site and this budget support whole of investigation. According the professor new role support financial problem totally.
Finally, the text contends that career in archaeology is fun and many people contributing to archaeological research only as unpaid amateurs. On the contrary, the lecturer opposes this point by expressing that local government divide archaeological procedure to groups and sections and hire a lot of specialist in several stage such as preservation, process data and etc...
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 346, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'He' must be used with a third-person verb: 'asserts'.
Suggestion: asserts
...ce near artifacts which found newly. He assert that before the construction begin to w...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 166, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun site seems to be countable; consider using: 'many sites'.
Suggestion: many sites
...gh government, this little budget makes many site without surveying. However, the speaker...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 315, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun stage seems to be countable; consider using: 'several stages'.
Suggestion: several stages
...ections and hire a lot of specialist in several stage such as preservation, process data and ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 364, Rule ID: AND_ETC[1]
Message: Use simply 'etc.'.
Suggestion: etc.
...tage such as preservation, process data and etc...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, however, if, so, in addition, in contrast, such as, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.01324503311 239% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1401.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 246.0 270.72406181 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.69512195122 5.08290768461 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96035189615 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05594010283 2.5805825403 118% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.593495934959 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 418.5 419.366225166 100% => 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: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 27.0 21.2450331126 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 60.4074641778 49.2860985944 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 155.666666667 110.228320801 141% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.3333333333 21.698381199 126% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.1111111111 7.06452816374 157% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0282429866633 0.272083759551 10% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0121414161314 0.0996497079465 12% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0113733904985 0.0662205650399 17% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0183388897061 0.162205337803 11% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0076274325842 0.0443174109184 17% => 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: 19.1 13.3589403974 143% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.61 53.8541721854 66% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.0289183223 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.08 12.2367328918 131% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.85 8.42419426049 117% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.498013245 122% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => 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.