The diagram below shows the development of cutting tools in the Stone Age.
The given figure provides the development of cutting tools in the Stone Age over a 0.6-million years period.
From an overall perspective, it is evident that there has been a dramatic alternation in cutting tools in two different eras. While it is obvious that tool A was sharp and edgy, the reverse pattern should be observed for tool B.
Taking a first look at the front view and side view of the two tools, tool A had more edgy patterns and scraps in the front view. However, the cutting tools 0.8 million years ago had a shape nearly similar to the stone in the present day, which was smoother at the surface. Its change could be seemed as a worn-out phenomenon due to climate change, catastrophe, etc. Following that, at the side aspect, the cutting tool 1.4 million years ago seemed thicker and denser than the others. It is conspicuous that after 0,6 million years, the side facet of the cutting tool was substantially thin and slight.
Moving to the back part of the cutting tool in the Stone Age, its change had a familiar trend as the front view. Surprisingly, its height continuously stayed in the same condition while the surface witnessed a tremendous shift. Finally, the surface of the later tool is wider and flatter when compared with the former. Its alternative pattern might rely on the designed tendency of people.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-11-11 | hahoaan | 84 | view |
| 2024-11-10 | Giang Tran | 56 | view |
| 2024-11-09 | Giang Tran | view | |
| 2024-11-02 | Giang Tran | view | |
| 2024-11-02 | Giang Tran | view |
- Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own disadvantaged people like the homeless and unemployed To what extent do you agree or disagree 67
- The maps show how the industrial area will change into a housing area in the future 59
- The diagram gives information about the process of making carbonated drinks 84
- The diagram below shows the manufacturing process for making sugar from sugar cane 84
- Some people think students should study the science of food and how to prepare it Others think that school time should be used in learning important subjects Discuss both views and give your opinion 73
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, look, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 7.0 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 1.00243902439 299% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 5.60731707317 196% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 25.0 33.7804878049 74% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1110.0 965.302439024 115% => OK
No of words: 233.0 196.424390244 119% => OK
Chars per words: 4.76394849785 4.92477711251 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.90696013833 3.73543355544 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5234810632 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 132.0 106.607317073 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56652360515 0.547539520022 103% => OK
syllable_count: 327.6 283.868780488 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 1.53170731707 392% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 8.94146341463 134% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 18.6746634657 43.030603864 43% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 92.5 112.824112599 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4166666667 22.9334400587 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.33333333333 5.23603664747 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 1.13902439024 615% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.270742458968 0.215688989381 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104954951183 0.103423049105 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0994382927651 0.0843802449381 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.196801230863 0.15604864568 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0876522559685 0.0819641961636 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 13.2329268293 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 61.2550243902 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 10.3012195122 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.33 11.4140731707 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.06136585366 102% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 40.7170731707 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, look, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 7.0 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 1.00243902439 299% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 5.60731707317 196% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 25.0 33.7804878049 74% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1110.0 965.302439024 115% => OK
No of words: 233.0 196.424390244 119% => OK
Chars per words: 4.76394849785 4.92477711251 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.90696013833 3.73543355544 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5234810632 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 132.0 106.607317073 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56652360515 0.547539520022 103% => OK
syllable_count: 327.6 283.868780488 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 1.53170731707 392% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 8.94146341463 134% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 18.6746634657 43.030603864 43% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 92.5 112.824112599 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4166666667 22.9334400587 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.33333333333 5.23603664747 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 1.13902439024 615% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.270742458968 0.215688989381 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104954951183 0.103423049105 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0994382927651 0.0843802449381 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.196801230863 0.15604864568 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0876522559685 0.0819641961636 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 13.2329268293 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 61.2550243902 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 10.3012195122 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.33 11.4140731707 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.06136585366 102% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 40.7170731707 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.