TPO-25 - Integrated Writing Task
In this set materials, the reading passage state that the clay jars which discovered in Iraq were not used as batteries. On the other hand, the listening section brings into question the reading points by providing different reasons (and examples).
First of all, the reading passage indicates that if the clay had used as batteries, they had had some other materials such as vires and containers. In contrast, the lecturer opposes this view by mentioning that these clays were discovered by native people, not archaeologists. Therefore, the native people may not recognize the importance of other materials or they threw way these materials. Because they did not have information about the importance of these materials.
Secondly, the reading argues that this clay is the same as a copper cylinder which used them for holding scrolls; conversely, what the lecturer believes is different. She points that it is true that the clays design for scrolls since people need to saved and collected water in the clay for producing electricity. Also, they did not make clay only for one purpose.
Finally, according to the reading, the ancient people did not need electric batteries. However, the speaker believes that the ancient people used the batteries for making shock, and this power as the same as the magic; indeed, they could not see the powers. Furthermore, most doctors used electric batteries for healing sick people.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 394, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ials or they threw way these materials. Because they did not have information about the...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, in contrast, such as, first of all, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 16.0 30.3222958057 53% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1212.0 1373.03311258 88% => OK
No of words: 231.0 270.72406181 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24675324675 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89854898053 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61765552786 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 126.0 145.348785872 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.545454545455 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 360.0 419.366225166 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.4793510846 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.0 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.25 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.5833333333 7.06452816374 192% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.275904886706 0.272083759551 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0996536250287 0.0996497079465 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0460345492188 0.0662205650399 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156937206316 0.162205337803 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0319769736904 0.0443174109184 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.