Both the reading and the passage discuss the communal encyclopedia. The author of the passage believes that traditional printed encyclopedias are better than the online ones and for this assertion provides three reasons. On the other hand, the professor in the lecture casts doubt on these reasons and states that online encyclopedia is better than the traditional counterpart.
At first, the passage states that many people that do not have academic education write the communal encyclopedias. Hence, they are not reliable and wrong information in the online encyclopedia is more than traditional printed ones. However, the professor in the lecture acclaims that the errors exist in both of them and it is not related to on or offline encyclopedia. He also, states that the errors in printed encyclopedia will remain for decades; hence, it will be more harmful.
Second, the passage states that the communal nature of the online encyclopedia gives this opportunity to hackers to delete the information or insert the wrong data. The lecture challenges this claim and explains that there are several ways for prohibiting the insertion of hackers. For instance, there is the read-only format for the information or we can hire a person whose job is controlling the information.
Finally, the passage makes a point about the importance of things. For example, the importance of historical events may not be mentioned correctly in the online encyclopedias. On the other, the professor in the lecture believes that the judgment of an academic group is not correct because is decided by a little group of people. Instead, in the online encyclopedia, the judgment belongs to a great diversity of people hence, it is more reliable and valid than the traditional encyclopedia.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, hence, however, may, second, so, for example, for instance, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.01324503311 239% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1491.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 284.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9645189901 2.5805825403 115% => OK
Unique words: 132.0 145.348785872 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.464788732394 0.540411800872 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 482.4 419.366225166 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.4078567989 49.2860985944 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.5 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2857142857 21.698381199 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.07142857143 7.06452816374 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => 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: 13.4 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 53.8541721854 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
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.
The author of the passage states that online encyclopedias will not be worthwhile for several reasons. However, the professor opposes this by saying that the online encyclopedias will be better than traditional encyclopedias and refutes each of the author's reasons.
First, the reading cast doubt of the authenticity of online information that the encyclopedia provides by saying that they are not written by experts. The professor refutes this point by saying that the existing traditional encyclopedia is not accurate as well. The error information of the traditional encyclopedia is hard to correct because it is printed. In contrast, the error of the online encyclopedia can be corrected easily compared to the traditional encyclopedia.
Second, the article posits that there are possibilities of fabrication of the online encyclopedia's information by dishonest users and hackers. However, the professor says that the authority takes two important steps: a special format that prevents hacking and special auditors board who always check for fabrication, to prevent corruption and false information.
Finally, the reading says that excessive detail information on a topic will often create false impression and people will not be able to distinguish what is important and what is unnecessary. The professor opposes this point by explaining that the detail information will attract and facilitate users because of its diversified information on a topic that is not possible in the traditional encyclopedia due to lack of space.