TPO 06_ Integrated Writing
<span style="font-size: 19.36px;">The passage is mainly concerned about the online encyclopedias. The author of the passage sees that the traditional printed encyclopedias is superior to the contemporary communal ones. In his argument, he states three evidences that mainly formed his. However, in the lecture, the speaker tackles everyone of these evidences and refutes them one by one, saying that the online encyclopedias are much better than the traditional ones.
First, the passage mentions that the contributors to the contemporary online encyclopedias don't always have adequate academic knowledge, and so, they may be inaccurate in their contributions. On the other hand, the lecturer states that even the traditional encyclopedias are not error-free. Also, he states that if someone searches only for an encyclopedia that has no error, he will never find one. However, in case of the online ones, the errors are easily corrected, and this gives advantage for them compared to the traditional ones.
Second, the passage discusses that even if the information in the online encyclopedias are correct, they are prone to be fabricated or deleted by hackers. In contrast, the speaker says that there exists a solution for this problem and it is that the important information are usually put in special formats to protect them from these malicious acts. In other words, the indisputable information are always protected from hackers and are not susceptible for such fabrications.
Lastly, the passage states that the communal encyclopedias tackle topics that are not really important in very deep details that the reader might be confused and thinks that this information is important. However, the lecturer says this is actually an advantage of the online encyclopedias. That is, the traditional encyclopedias don't include some information just because the limited space they are constrained by. Nevertheless, the unlimited space that the online encyclopedias have gives them the advantage of focusing on very diverse kinds of topics, which is not the case in the traditional ones.
To recapitulate, the passage states three disadvantages of the online encyclopedias (the knowledge of the contributors, the possibility of fabrication and the tackling of trivial topics). The lecturer however, refutes these evidences.</span>
- TPO-05 - Independent Writing TaskDo you agree or disagree with the following statement?People today spend too much time on personal enjoyment-doing things they like to do-rather than doing things they should do.Use specific reasons and examples to support 70
- Educators should base their assessment of students' learning not on students' grasp of facts but on the ability to explain the ideas, trends, and concepts that those facts illustrate. 58
- Several recent studies have shown a link between health and stair usage. One recently completed study shows that people who live in stairs-only apartment buildings (that is, buildings without elevators) live an average of three years longer than do people 55
- Manned space flight is costly and dangerous. Moreover, the recent success of a series of unmanned space probes and satellites has demonstrated that a great deal of useful information can be gathered without the costs and risks associated with sending men 63
- The following appeared in a magazine article about planning for retirement."Clearview should be a top choice for anyone seeking a place to retire, because it has spectacular natural beauty and a consistent climate. Another advantage is that housing costs 63
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 92, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
...o the contemporary online encyclopedias dont always have adequate academic knowledge...
Line 7, column 331, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
... That is, the traditional encyclopedias dont include some information just because t...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, however, if, lastly, may, nevertheless, really, second, so, in contrast, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 10.4613686534 191% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 22.412803532 165% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1994.0 1373.03311258 145% => OK
No of words: 355.0 270.72406181 131% => OK
Chars per words: 5.61690140845 5.08290768461 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34067318298 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.35369118947 2.5805825403 130% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.47323943662 0.540411800872 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 643.5 419.366225166 153% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.55342163355 116% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.23620309051 182% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.1095431055 49.2860985944 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.294117647 110.228320801 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8823529412 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.88235294118 7.06452816374 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
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: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.3589403974 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 53.8541721854 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 11.0289183223 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.32 12.2367328918 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.54 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 63.6247240618 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.2008830022 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.