TPO53 Integrated writing
Both the reading and the lecture discuss the policy of imposing high taxes on unhealthy products. The reading implies that the policy has a number of social benefits. However, the professor strongly disagrees with the reading. Accordingly, she gave three refutations.
First of all, the reading passage indicates that the taxes discourage people from indulging in unhealthy behaviors. Yet, the speaker severely challenges this theory by arguing that the high taxes may make people buy cheaper but low-quality unhealthy products. Moreover, cheaper but low-quality products may be more harmful to people's health. In other words, the high taxes cannot lead healthy behaviors.
Secondly, the reading suggests that the taxes are financially fair. Nonetheless, the scholar seriously contradicts this statement because this policy does not take the income into consideration. Also, the high taxes are more expensive to people whose income is low. As a result, this policy will create financial loading to people who have low income.
Last but not least, the passage mentions that the high rate of taxation on cigarettes significantly increases revenue for the government. Once again, the professor opposes this hypothesis by contending that the government will depend too much on the policy. In other words, the government does not want to lose the profit from this policy. Thus, the government will not establish the law such as preventing smoking in outdoor space.
In conclusion, the professor argues against each theory in the reading. That is to say, the policy imposing high taxes on unhealthy food does not have many social benefits.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, first, however, if, may, moreover, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, thus, in conclusion, such as, as a result, first of all, in other words, that is to say
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: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1392.0 1373.03311258 101% => OK
No of words: 256.0 270.72406181 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.4375 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69800590063 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.546875 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 419.4 419.366225166 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.23620309051 170% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.0796925874 49.2860985944 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 77.3333333333 110.228320801 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.2222222222 21.698381199 66% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0555555556 7.06452816374 142% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.0 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.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 53.8541721854 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 11.0289183223 80% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.68 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => 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.