TPO 16
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.
The reading and the lecture both discuss archeological sites and artifacts in Great Britain While the reading states many problems faced archeologist in the twentieth century to discover old cultural artifacts, the lecture refutes each of the problems provided in the reading passage and states that in 1990 new rules and guidelines were established to improve the situation.
First of all, the reading states that during constructing projects in Great Britain many valuable artifacts were lost. According to the reading, builders more likely unearthed archeological valuable sites and continued forward with constructions without conserving the precious artifacts. On the other hand, the lecturer argues this point by stating according to the new guidelines, construction companies should first, examine the site for valuable artifacts, the next step is to excavate the site before they construct the building. Therefore, this solution aided to preserve the precious artifacts and prevented them to be lost while digging for building.
Second, the reading states that financial and monetary support for archeological research projects was not enough. According to the professor, the government has funded a few important research sites and left most of the interesting sites undiscovered. In addition, changing government priorities cited a period of fund reduction. However, the professor casts doubt on this claim by saying that according to the new guidelines, the government would not be responsible to fund the archeological sites, but the contracting companies. First, the construction company must study the artifacts carefully and the next step is to fund the project and that is unlike the practice in the past. Therefore, this solution challenges the second problem in the reading passage.
Third, the reading states that it was arduous to find and have a career in archeology. Furthermore, many people who were interested to become archeologist ended up changing to other careers and volunteering to help in archeological sites as unpaid work due to the limitation this career positions. Nevertheless, the professor challenges this point by stating that lots of paid work and opportunities were provided. First, archeologists were needed to examine the valuable artifacts. Second, to estimate the site. Finally, to enter the data and write an article about the artifacts. Therefore, again this solution argues the third problem mentioned in the reading passage.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-27 | Shayooooon | 86 | view |
- The reading and the lecture both discuss whether R. robustus is an active hunter or a scavenger 60
- n an effort to encourage ecologically sustainable forestry practices an international organization started issuing certifications to wood companies that meet high ecological standards by conserving resources and recycling materials Companies that receive 80
- Technology has made children less creative than before 81
- fossils of ancient organisms 73
- TPO 30 Burning mirrors 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 92, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...cal sites and artifacts in Great Britain While the reading states many problems f...
^^
Line 5, column 170, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[5]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'few important research'.
Suggestion: few important research
...he professor, the government has funded a few important research sites and left most of the interesting ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, third, while, in addition, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 7.30242825607 205% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 30.3222958057 155% => 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: 2109.0 1373.03311258 154% => OK
No of words: 376.0 270.72406181 139% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.60904255319 5.08290768461 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40348946061 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99203782501 2.5805825403 116% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 145.348785872 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.494680851064 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 635.4 419.366225166 152% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 79.6387677788 49.2860985944 162% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.166666667 110.228320801 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8888888889 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.88888888889 7.06452816374 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 4.33554083885 254% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.284210946244 0.272083759551 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.092734033561 0.0996497079465 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0519939372457 0.0662205650399 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.177775417838 0.162205337803 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0404089602042 0.0443174109184 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.3589403974 115% => 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: 15.26 12.2367328918 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.74 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 63.6247240618 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.