The author and the professor both talked about how Chaco Canyon which is the huge stone house in New Mexico was used for. The speaker refutes the main ideas made in the reading passage. The following three theories support for convincing her perspective.
First of all, the speaker claims that Chaco building looks alike Native American houses however the structure of inside of the building is not helping to convince as residence. According to the author, she states that houses accomodate hundred of people each. On the other hand, there are not many fire place to cook daily foods thus this theory is not enough evidence to regard the houses as residential building.
Second, the theory made in the reading material was suspicious about the Chaco structures were used to store foods. The Chaco tribe are known as people eating maize however there is no findings related to the supplies of maize. Also, if they had to grain maize, they probably spilled some on the floor. Hence, the speaker does not think the houses were used as storage.
Lastly, about ceremonial centers. In the reading passage, the researchers has shown that tons of old materials such as broken pots were founded in a deposition. The professor disagrees with theory because he thinks that those products might be left over from constructing people. They had foods there during they built the buildings and left their trash. Therefore, the theory is not right to say true.
In conclusion, the professor disrupted the ideas made by the author.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 187, 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.
...main ideas made in the reading passage. The following three theories support for co...
^^^
Line 5, column 174, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'there are no findings'?
Suggestion: there are no findings
...re known as people eating maize however there is no findings related to the supplies of maize. Also,...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, however, if, lastly, look, second, so, therefore, thus, in conclusion, such as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 12.0772626932 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1273.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 255.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.99215686275 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99608801488 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.36537889164 2.5805825403 92% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.611764705882 0.540411800872 113% => OK
syllable_count: 385.2 419.366225166 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.2017669748 49.2860985944 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.5625 110.228320801 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.9375 21.698381199 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.1875 7.06452816374 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.326826289769 0.272083759551 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.090891813147 0.0996497079465 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0581496397639 0.0662205650399 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.155941576199 0.162205337803 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0872185880398 0.0443174109184 197% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.0 13.3589403974 75% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 53.8541721854 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 11.0289183223 73% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.85 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.