Robert E. Peary was a well-known adventurer and arctic explorer who in 1909 set out to reach the North Pole. When he returned from the expedition, he claimed to have reached the pole on April 7, 1909. This report made him into an international celebrity. Though some historians have expressed doubts that Peary did in fact reach the North Pole, three arguments provide strong support for the truth of Peary's claim. First, the National Geographic Society put together a committee that was instructed to conduct a thorough investigation of Peary's records and equipment. At the end of the investigation, the committee concluded that Peary's accounts were consistent and persuasive and declared that he had indeed reached the North Pole. Second, a recent expedition provides support for Peary's claim that he reached the North Pole in only 37 days after setting out from Ellesmere Island off the coast of Greenland. Skeptics used to argue that Peary could not have traveled that fast, since even modern snowmobiles take longer to cover the same distance. However, a British explorer named Tom Avery recently made the same trek in less than 37 days. In fact, Avery used the same kind of dogsled and the same number and breed of dogs as Peary had. Thus, Peary's claims are not impossible, and he very well might have been telling the truth. Third, there are photographs taken by Peary that support his claim to have reached the North Pole. Measuring the shadows in Peary's photographs makes it possible to calculate the Surf s position in the sun. The Surf s position established from the photographs corresponds exactly to the Surf s position as it should have been at the North Pole on that day. This provides strong evidence that Peary reached the North Pole and took the photographs there.
The reading and listening material have a debate on Peary’s experience to the North Pole. The reading believes that the adventurer definitely has been to the pole, while the professor asserts that the evidence mentioned in the reading are not solid and convincing.
Firstly, the passage claims that the National Geographic Society set up a committee to investigate this trip, whereas the lecture casts doubt on the objectivity of the investigation. According to her, there were many close friends of Peary in the committee, who funded much money on the trip. Also, the investigation last for only two days and did not examine the records carefully. As a result, there’s no meaning inside the investigation.
Moreover, the brief reading states that rationality of the trek is supported by a similar expedition of Avery. However, the professor's talk thinks there are different important ways between two expeditions. She says modern trek gets the aid of airplane instead of transporting food by himself. Still, Avery's trek has experienced a more favorable climate condition than that of a hundred years ago. The hardship of them differs a lot. So it is not fair to compare them.
Finally, the author of the reading passage argues that photos taken by Peary provide strong evidence to prove trip's reality. By contrast, in accordance with the professor, this view does not hold water. It is because that the photographs have become faded and blurred. Regarding shadows, they cannot be used to calculate the position of the sun with accuracy. So in this sense, the photos make little sense.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, regarding, so, still, whereas, while, as a result
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 : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1346.0 1373.03311258 98% => OK
No of words: 261.0 270.72406181 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15708812261 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0193898071 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82992147282 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.64367816092 0.540411800872 119% => OK
syllable_count: 422.1 419.366225166 101% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.9466772613 49.2860985944 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.1764705882 110.228320801 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.3529411765 21.698381199 71% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.05882352941 7.06452816374 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0922609749161 0.272083759551 34% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.024364034555 0.0996497079465 24% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0361719029808 0.0662205650399 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0553301951879 0.162205337803 34% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0438580962049 0.0443174109184 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.06 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.98 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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.