TPO-05 - Integrated Writing Task As early as the twelfth century A.D., the settlements of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico in the American Southwest were notable for their "great houses," massive stone buildings that contain hundreds of rooms and often stand th

The article states that there are 3 theories that supported the use of the buildings in the settlements of Chaco Canyon.The author provides three of suppor. Conversely, the professor states that none of these theories is convincing and he refutes each of the author's reasons.

First, the reading avers that the Chaco structures were residential, with each housing hundreds of people. The professor agrees that the sturctires from ouside may seem like the well-known apartment buldings at Taos, New mexico. But, he says that from the design from inside it opposes this theory. If hndreds people were living there, ifireplaces hsould be found there too. Because, people were used for cooking. But, a few fireplaces were found there for about 10 families despite of the fact that structures have enough rooms for hundreds. This idea clearly proof that the Chaco Canyon structures could not have been residential.

Second, the article claims that the Chaco structures were used to store food supplies, such as grain maize. The professor, on the other hand, refutes this point by explaining this theory is not support by evidence. The sructures have enough space to store food, however, researchers did not find either traces for maize nore did they find containers of grain maize. Therefore, if they did not discover any spills and remain of big containers, it clearly proof that the structures were used for storage food supplies at all.

Third, the reading posits that the houses were used as ceremonial centers,broken pots that have been discovered supports this theory. However, the prorfessor opposes this point by stating that this theory is not well supported. He explains that the mound that discovered, in one house of the Chaco Structures, contain other materials that unexpectedly to be found in cermonial centers. For example, huge quantities of construction materials, like sand, and construction tools too. The professor adds that this place could have been a trash place for construction materials. ALso, broken pots could be regular trash from construction workers, such as their meals. And so, the professor concludes this theory has not good evidence to proof that the houses were used for sepcial ceremonies.

Votes
Average: 7.5 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 121, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...ings in the settlements of Chaco Canyon.The author provides three of suppor. Conver...
^^^
Line 5, column 455, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'proofs'?
Suggestion: proofs
...nd remain of big containers, it clearly proof that the structures were used for stora...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 74, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , broken
...e houses were used as ceremonial centers,broken pots that have been discovered supports...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 453, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...es of construction materials, like sand, and construction tools too. The professo...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, first, however, if, may, second, so, therefore, third, well, for example, such as, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 22.412803532 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1875.0 1373.03311258 137% => OK
No of words: 358.0 270.72406181 132% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2374301676 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34981470047 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63629296039 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 145.348785872 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.525139664804 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 548.1 419.366225166 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.0336913692 49.2860985944 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.75 110.228320801 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.15 7.06452816374 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.436456787667 0.272083759551 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.1317832975 0.0996497079465 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0670499377497 0.0662205650399 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.249218989568 0.162205337803 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0828202220975 0.0443174109184 187% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 53.8541721854 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.32 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 63.6247240618 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.

Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.