The article states that studying the old cultural and the artifacts of United Kingdom by the archaeologists was faced with serious problems and limitations and provides three reasons of supports. However, the professor explains that there is new rule adopted in the United Kingdom that changes the field of archaeology and help in preserving the artifacts and refutes each of the author's reasons.
First, The reading states that many precious artifacts were lost since the Britain's people tended to make a lot of construction in British cities. While digging, builders removed the archeological precious sites. Therefore, these artifacts destroyed. The professor refutes this point and he states that the archaeological site has to be examined before any construction to see the value of the site. The builder, the archaeologists, and the government should get together to preserve the artifacts, and the site should properly be excavated before the construction processed.
Second, the article claims that the financial support for archaeological research was not enough, which leads the archaeologists to investigate of most important sites, left hundred of sites, and changing the priority of the government leads to reduce the funding. The professor says that the new rule states that the funding to examine the archaeological site should be paid by the construction company such as the initial examination, and all the work of the construction.
the third, the reading claims that it was difficult to have jobs in archaeology. Many people just contribute to archaeological research as an unpaid amateur. The professor says that this claim is problematic; he explains that a lot of paid jobs are available. They hire experts' archaeologists to examine the site, preserve artifact, make research, and process the data. Increasing jobs help to increase the numbers of the professional in this field.
Essay evaluation report
there is new rule
there is a new rule
that changes the field of archaeology and help in preserving the artifacts
that changes the field of archaeology and helps in preserving the artifacts
Therefore, these artifacts destroyed.
Therefore, these artifacts are destroyed.
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 24 in 30
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 14 12
No. of Words: 297 250
No. of Characters: 1572 1200
No. of Different Words: 143 150
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.151 4.2
Average Word Length: 5.293 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.007 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 118 80
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 97 60
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 67 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.214 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.476 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.331 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.543 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.073 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 4
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The article states that studying the old...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...refutes each of the authors reasons. First, The reading states that many prec...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d before the construction processed. Second, the article claims that the fina...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nd all the work of the construction. the third, the reading claims that it wa...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 6, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...l the work of the construction. the third, the reading claims that it was d...
^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'second', 'so', 'therefore', 'third', 'while', 'as to', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.259146341463 0.261695866417 99% => OK
Verbs: 0.167682926829 0.158904122519 106% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0762195121951 0.0723426182421 105% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0243902439024 0.0435111971325 56% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0121951219512 0.0277247811725 44% => OK
Prepositions: 0.112804878049 0.128828473217 88% => OK
Participles: 0.0365853658537 0.0370669169778 99% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.08940494346 2.5805825403 120% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0335365853659 0.0208969081088 160% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.00154638098197 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.158536585366 0.128158765124 124% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.00914634146341 0.0158828679856 58% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00609756097561 0.0114777025283 53% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1925.0 1645.83664459 117% => OK
No of words: 297.0 271.125827815 110% => OK
Chars per words: 6.48148148148 6.08160592843 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15134772569 4.04852973271 103% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.417508417508 0.374372842146 112% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.3367003367 0.287516216867 117% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.242424242424 0.187439937562 129% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.154882154882 0.113142543107 137% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08940494346 2.5805825403 120% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511784511785 0.539623497131 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 51.1907697707 53.8517498576 95% => OK
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0529801325 107% => OK
Sentence length: 21.2142857143 21.7502111507 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.6059089355 49.3711431718 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.5 132.220823453 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2142857143 21.7502111507 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.785714285714 0.878197800319 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 3.39072847682 147% => OK
Readability: 54.8843193843 50.5018328374 109% => OK
Elegance: 2.0 1.90840788429 105% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.718880928446 0.549887131256 131% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.151454719513 0.142949733639 106% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.140623966003 0.0787303798458 179% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.621854733097 0.631733273073 98% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.232363077953 0.139662658121 166% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.358209556349 0.266732575781 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.15759614038 0.103435571967 152% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.599313943706 0.414875509568 144% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0688603790614 0.0530846634433 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.576649023971 0.40443939384 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0430472764459 0.0528353158467 81% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.26048565121 94% => OK
Positive topic words: 5.0 3.49668874172 143% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 3.62251655629 55% => OK
Neutral topic words: 4.0 3.1766004415 126% => OK
Total topic words: 11.0 10.2958057395 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.