integrated writing
Both reading and lecture try to discuss the effects of increasing commercial fossil trade. In the reading section, the writer contends that this event has some disadvantages for both scientists and public and he provides three reasons for support; however, the professor casts doubt on the reading points by indicating that the writer exaggerated problems and its benefits outweigh its disadvantages.
First of all, the writer claims that public has no permission to visit fossils because they are sold to private collectors instead of being in museums. Hence, public interest will decrease; in contrast, the professor rejects this notion by stating that there are a lot of fossils available to display for public so institutions and libraries can easily purchase fossils and show them to public.
Moreover, the reading passage holds the view that since fossils’ buyers spend a great deal of money to buy fossil, scientists and universities cannot compete with them to collect fossils. As a result, scientists will lose significant information; on the contrary, the lecturer refutes this claim by considering the fact that scientists should recognize the value of fossils. Before collectors buy fossils, they pass through scientists' hands so no important concepts will be missed.
In addition, the writer mentions that collectors are unresponsive to the precious scientific evidence of fossils such as the way that fossils are buried; conversely, the professor indicates that although whatever damages that commercial fossils collect do, many fossils simply discover. Also, he points out, it is better to lose some information such as the location of fossils than they are not discovered.
(263 word)
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'conversely', 'first', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'moreover', 'so', 'in addition', 'in contrast', 'such as', 'as a result', 'first of all', 'on the contrary']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.272727272727 0.261695866417 104% => OK
Verbs: 0.158249158249 0.158904122519 100% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0572390572391 0.0723426182421 79% => OK
Adverbs: 0.047138047138 0.0435111971325 108% => OK
Pronouns: 0.03367003367 0.0277247811725 121% => OK
Prepositions: 0.138047138047 0.128828473217 107% => OK
Participles: 0.030303030303 0.0370669169778 82% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.83132052839 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Infinitives: 0.030303030303 0.0208969081088 145% => OK
Particles: 0.003367003367 0.00154638098197 218% => OK
Determiners: 0.10101010101 0.128158765124 79% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.020202020202 0.0158828679856 127% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.003367003367 0.0114777025283 29% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1705.0 1645.83664459 104% => OK
No of words: 265.0 271.125827815 98% => OK
Chars per words: 6.43396226415 6.08160592843 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03470204552 4.04852973271 100% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.449056603774 0.374372842146 120% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.366037735849 0.287516216867 127% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.237735849057 0.187439937562 127% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.154716981132 0.113142543107 137% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83132052839 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.588679245283 0.539623497131 109% => OK
Word variations: 61.5039114975 53.8517498576 114% => OK
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0529801325 77% => OK
Sentence length: 26.5 21.7502111507 122% => OK
Sentence length SD: 88.1201452563 49.3711431718 178% => OK
Chars per sentence: 170.5 132.220823453 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.5 21.7502111507 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.4 0.878197800319 159% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.39072847682 0% => OK
Readability: 63.1037735849 50.5018328374 125% => OK
Elegance: 1.84507042254 1.90840788429 97% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.549887131256 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.137679748916 0.142949733639 96% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0639770955351 0.0787303798458 81% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.689860370547 0.631733273073 109% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.156094015903 0.139662658121 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.266732575781 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.103435571967 0% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.320446672006 0.414875509568 77% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0491189279633 0.0530846634433 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.40443939384 0% => The content is off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0528353158467 0% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.26048565121 47% => OK
Positive topic words: 5.0 3.49668874172 143% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 3.62251655629 55% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 3.1766004415 31% => OK
Total topic words: 8.0 10.2958057395 78% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.