The reading and the listening are about the condition of the UK archaeology, where many artifacts remain in different locations. The writer claims that the UK archeology department faced difficulties to continue exploration and preservation of many old cultural artifacts. However, the professor refutes this idea and he claims that new archeological rule and regulation indeed improve all three fields which posited in the reading.
First of all, the writer avers that since the population of the UK is increasing and more and more building are building every year, most of the time builders uncovered archaeologically valuable location, but did not save the artifacts at all. The professor, on the other hand, rebuts this point and states that since the regulation look at the process of new construction; local government and archaeologist first examine the location and if found any artifacts then they preserve the site by either keeping whole construction stop or saving the explored tools and others.
Secondly, the author mentions that since only selected site exploration and preservation are getting government funding, most cases archaeologist faced financial crisis for doing his work in less important site. However, the lecturer says that the writer might be wrong in the assumption that government allots money for all sites. But all exploration cost are beared by the construction company, so no such financial crisis remain, as all site must follow government rules.
Finally, the reading tries to prove that career of archaeologists are not good by saying that there are few vacancies for a archaeologist. The lecturer refutes this, and he informs that since every construction site need to explore and examine by archaeologist, many new jobs are available nowadays. He further states that since construction site must be checked, and preserved, researched, processed, and reported of the explored artifacts by archaeologist; indeed, this types of job is most available now.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 127, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'cases'' or 'case's'?
Suggestion: cases'; case's
...on are getting government funding, most cases archaeologist faced financial crisis fo...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 123, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...saying that there are few vacancies for a archaeologist. The lecturer refutes thi...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, then, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 7.30242825607 246% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 5.01324503311 439% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1691.0 1373.03311258 123% => OK
No of words: 311.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.43729903537 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19942759058 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03281065481 2.5805825403 118% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 145.348785872 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.559485530547 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 516.6 419.366225166 123% => 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: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.51434878587 330% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 60.0779108483 49.2860985944 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 153.727272727 110.228320801 139% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.2727272727 21.698381199 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 7.06452816374 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
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: 0.236716034976 0.272083759551 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0927793777394 0.0996497079465 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.026211782883 0.0662205650399 40% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140403089713 0.162205337803 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0160116135924 0.0443174109184 36% => 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: 18.3 13.3589403974 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.6 53.8541721854 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.0289183223 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.57 12.2367328918 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 10.7273730684 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.