The United Kingdom (sometimes referred to as Britain) has a long and rich history of human settlement. Traces of buildings, tools, and art can be found from periods going back many thousands of years: from the Stone Age, through the Bronze Age, the Iron Age, the time of the Roman colonization, the Middle Ages, up to the beginnings of the industrial age. Yet for most of the twentieth century, the science of archaeology,dedicated to uncovering and studying old cultural artifacts,was faced with serious problems and limitations in Britain.
First, many valuable artifacts were lost to construction projects. The growth of Britain's population, especially from the 1950s on, spurred a lot of new construction in British cities, towns, and villages. While digging foundations for new buildings, the builders often uncovered archaeologically valuable sites.Usually, however, they proceeded with the construction and did not preserve the artifacts. Many archaeologically precious artifacts were therefore destroyed.
Second, many archaeologists felt that the financial support for archaeological research was inadequate. For most of the twentieth century, archaeology was funded mostly through government funds and grants, which allowed archaeologists to investigate a handful of the most important sites but which left hundreds of other interesting projects without support. Furthermore, changing government priorities brought about periodic reductions in funding.
Third, it was difficult to have a career in archaeology. Archaeology jobs were to be found at universities or with a few government agencies, but there were never many positions available. Many people who wanted to become archaeologists ended up pursuing other careers and contributing to archaeological research only as unpaid amateurs.
In the reading passage, the author explains several problems and limitations faced in archaeology from most of the twentieth century in Britain, However, in the following lecture, the professor mentions new guideline passed by the United Kingdom in order to improve the current situation.
First, contradictory to the author claims that site constructions have destroyed many artifacts with the scientific value willingly or by an accident, the new guidelines force construction companies to employ an archaeologist in order to check the site. If the site has any archaeological worth, the construction company accompanied by expert archaeologists have to make a plan to preserve the artifact by document it or even creating the the construction in a way that doesn't affect the artifact.
regarding the second problem mentioned by the author about inadequate financial support by the government, the professor explains new guidelines also oblige construction companies to fully pay for every needed expense by the archaeologit team on the site . The expenses included but not limited to the excavation, research, documentation and so on.
The last problem listed by the author is that it is really hard to find a proper job related to the archaeology. The professor refutes this point by saying that with the financial support of construction companies due to the new guideline, many new jobs have been created to support every needed stage to preserve artifacts.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 436, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...rtifact by document it or even creating the the construction in a way that doesnt affec...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 436, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...rtifact by document it or even creating the the construction in a way that doesnt affec...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 471, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ting the the construction in a way that doesnt affect the artifact. regarding the s...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Regarding
...way that doesnt affect the artifact. regarding the second problem mentioned by the aut...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 255, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...nse by the archaeologit team on the site . The expenses included but not limited t...
^^
Line 7, column 114, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... proper job related to the archaeology. The professor refutes this point by saying ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, really, regarding, second, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 10.4613686534 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 12.0772626932 33% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 22.412803532 31% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1242.0 1373.03311258 90% => OK
No of words: 230.0 270.72406181 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.4 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89432290496 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.14212363091 2.5805825403 122% => OK
Unique words: 133.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.578260869565 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 384.3 419.366225166 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => 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: 7.0 13.0662251656 54% => 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: 32.0 21.2450331126 151% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 70.5766337005 49.2860985944 143% => OK
Chars per sentence: 177.428571429 110.228320801 161% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.8571428571 21.698381199 151% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.57142857143 7.06452816374 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => 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: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0367139115929 0.272083759551 13% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0170859042029 0.0996497079465 17% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0298812875588 0.0662205650399 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0278315242563 0.162205337803 17% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0352758027739 0.0443174109184 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.4 13.3589403974 153% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.54 53.8541721854 57% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.0 11.0289183223 154% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.63 12.2367328918 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.62 8.42419426049 114% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 10.7273730684 182% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.498013245 141% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => 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.