The reading passage and lecture are both about communal online encyclopedias. The author of the reading feels that the traditional , printed encyclopedias are much better than online encyclopedias. The lecturer challenges each of the points made by the author. She is of the opinion that the online encyclopedias are more useful and the points in the passage are not convincing.
To begin with, the author believes that online encyclopedias can be edited by online community, which often lack academic knowledge. It is mentioned in the passage that traditional encyclopedias are written by experts of related fields, therefore, they are more reliable. This specific claims was challenged by the lecturer. She claims that even traditional encyclopedias are not 100 percent accurate. In addition, she says that the error in online encyclopedias can be corrected unlike traditional ones.
Secondly, the author contends that online encyclopedias can be manipulated, deleted or hacked by cyber criminal. In the article, it is said that traditional encyclopedias are more secure and protected. The professor rebuts this argument by stating that online encyclopedias take measures to protect the material. Moreover, she mentions that the crucial facts in online encyclopedias are read only in nature, means cannot be changed. Also, there are some editors whose job is to monitor the content.
Finally, the author contends that there are a lot of information available on online encyclopedia even for a trivial topic, which makes it difficult to understand. The article says that traditional encyclopedias are better in what information to include and what to exclude. The lecturer counters this point by saying that online encyclopedias have more variety and diversity than traditional ones.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 131, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...f the reading feels that the traditional , printed encyclopedias are much better t...
^^
Line 1, column 199, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... much better than online encyclopedias. The lecturer challenges each of the points ...
^^^
Line 1, column 292, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e author. She is of the opinion that the online encyclopedias are more useful and...
^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... be corrected unlike traditional ones. Secondly, the author contends that onlin...
^^^
Line 5, column 240, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d. The professor rebuts this argument by stating that online encyclopedias take m...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, in addition, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 10.4613686534 201% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1519.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 274.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.54379562044 5.08290768461 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11981351424 2.5805825403 121% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.496350364964 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 498.6 419.366225166 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.55342163355 116% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.0425055398 49.2860985944 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 89.3529411765 110.228320801 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.1176470588 21.698381199 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.47058823529 7.06452816374 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.358273584711 0.272083759551 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.127287954958 0.0996497079465 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0639110248771 0.0662205650399 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.239137826031 0.162205337803 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0157282216499 0.0443174109184 35% => 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: 12.7 13.3589403974 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.31 53.8541721854 71% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.56 12.2367328918 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.