TPO5 Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific theories discussed the reading passage.
The reading explains about the three possible usages of the settlements of Chaco Canyon, which are massive buildings that contain hundreds of rooms and often stand three or four stories high. However, the professor says each of the usage stated in the passage contradicts the evidence found in the spot.
In the first theory, the passage states that the settlements were residential and hundreds of people lived in each of them because the outside structures of them are similar to those of apartment buildings in Southwest societies. But the professor refutes this idea by saying that the inside structures contradict to this hypothesis. He says there should have been many fire places for daily cooking if many people had lived there, but there are not so many fire places.
In the second theory, the article says that the settlements were used for storing food supplies because the size would be suitable for the purpose. However, again the professor disagree with this hypothesis because if they were used for accumulating foods, remains of big containers would be found from the relics.
In the third hypothesis, the reading says that those houses were used as ceremonial centers because a large number of broken pots were found. However, the professor rebuts this idea by saying that there shouldn't be so much broken pots because if the pots used in the ceremony wouldn't be broken so easily.
To sum up, the professor don't believe that the buildings of Chaco Canyon weren't used for the intentions mentioned in the passage.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 101, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...were used as ceremonial centers because a large number of broken pots were found. However, the pr...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 204, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
...r rebuts this idea by saying that there shouldnt be so much broken pots because if the p...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 277, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...ecause if the pots used in the ceremony wouldnt be broken so easily. To sum up, the ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 26, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... so easily. To sum up, the professor dont believe that the buildings of Chaco Can...
^^^^
Line 9, column 74, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: weren't
...ieve that the buildings of Chaco Canyon werent used for the intentions mentioned in th...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, so, third, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1286.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 255.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0431372549 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99608801488 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45820112834 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 145.348785872 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.513725490196 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 391.5 419.366225166 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.7162428035 49.2860985944 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.6 110.228320801 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5 21.698381199 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.3 7.06452816374 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 4.33554083885 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
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: 0.0589819057369 0.272083759551 22% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0248149125282 0.0996497079465 25% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0220907127438 0.0662205650399 33% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0353849054919 0.162205337803 22% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0187059117453 0.0443174109184 42% => 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: 15.1 13.3589403974 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 63.6247240618 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.