TPO 28- integrated writing - Peary's trip to the North Pole
According to the reading passage, in spite of the expressed doubts, it is proved that Robert Peary, a well-known arctic explorer, reached the North Pole on April 7, 1909. On the other hand, the lecturer finds the presented reasons in the reading dubious and unconvincing and provides counter evidence to refute them all.
The first reason discussed by the reading is that the committee put together by the National Geographic Society declared that Peary’s accounts were consistent and he had actually reached the North Pole. Conversely, the professor states that the committee was mostly consisting of Peary’s close friends who had funded his trips, so it did not act objectively and their investigation took only 2 days which shows it was not a thorough examination and can not be considered as a proof.
Secondly, the reading asserts that due to the same trek made by Tom Avery, which was so similar to Peary’s, it is believed that Peary’s trip could have also ended up in the North Pole. On the contrary, the speaker explains that Avery’s trip had been different in many ways; for example, although he had the same sled as Peary’s, he carried less weight by his sled and the weather in which he started his journey was highly favorable which is in direct contradiction with the weather in which Peary had set off.
The last argument explained by the reading is that the position of the Surf calculated by the measurements of the shadows in the photographs taken by Peary shows that he had indeed been at the North Pole on that day. However, the lecturer casts doubt on this point and highlights the fact that the photographs were taken by a primitive camera and were so blurred and fainted, so they could have not shown the precise measurement of the shadows and therefore calculate the position of the Sun.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 260, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...the professor states that the committee was mostly consisting of Peary's close friends who had f...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, conversely, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, for example, in spite of, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1533.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 313.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89776357827 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20616286096 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76957925716 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 145.348785872 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.533546325879 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 456.3 419.366225166 109% => 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
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 13.0662251656 61% => 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: 39.0 21.2450331126 184% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 59.3037730671 49.2860985944 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 191.625 110.228320801 174% => OK
Words per sentence: 39.125 21.698381199 180% => OK
Discourse Markers: 18.375 7.06452816374 260% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.443252411863 0.272083759551 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.197559297097 0.0996497079465 198% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.109206077086 0.0662205650399 165% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.248341884608 0.162205337803 153% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0637725333799 0.0443174109184 144% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 21.2 13.3589403974 159% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.35 53.8541721854 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.3 11.0289183223 157% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 63.6247240618 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 17.6 10.498013245 168% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 11.2008830022 161% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.