In this set of the materials, the author of the reading passage explains three problems that the old cultural artifacts were hard to uncover and study in Britain for the twentieth century. However, the professor expresses that since 1990, the government made new rules to improve the science of archeology.
First of all, the author claims that most of the valuable artifacts were destroyed by construction projects because the builders did not preserve the artifacts well. On the contrary, the professor asserts that according to the new guidelines, before starting the constructions, the sites need to be examed by archaeologists. If the sites are valuable, the builders, archaeologists, and the local government should make the plan to preserve the sites.
In addition, the author states that without the government financial support for the researchers, it is hard to investigate crucial sites. Conversely, the professor asserts that any expense of investigating the artifacts, since the new rules, the expense needs to be paid by construction companies. This is a whole new source of the financial support.
Finally, the author raises the point that archaeology occupations are rare, many archaeologists hard to find the job instead of doing unpaid amateurs. On the other hand, the professor says that, nowadays, there are a lot of paid jobs exist, and most of them didn't exist before. There are a lot of job opportunities such as doing researches, processing the data, and others stage of archaeological stuff.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 259, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...ot of paid jobs exist, and most of them didnt exist before. There are a lot of job op...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, finally, first, however, if, so, well, in addition, such as, first of all, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 22.412803532 54% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1284.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 242.0 270.72406181 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30578512397 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94415379849 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05603028202 2.5805825403 118% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.561983471074 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 382.5 419.366225166 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
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: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.7269051683 49.2860985944 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.727272727 110.228320801 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 21.698381199 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.0 7.06452816374 156% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.274122296685 0.272083759551 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0898859780361 0.0996497079465 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0435129084417 0.0662205650399 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.146691423527 0.162205337803 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0126415997194 0.0443174109184 29% => 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: 14.6 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.