archaeology in the united kingdom
The text discussing some problems about archaeology and defines three reasons to support different kind of problems that archaeologists face to in the United kingdom. On the other hand, the professor explains that the rule which approved in 1990 made a big change in the archaeology and improved the situations, and in this way she disagrees with claimed reasons.
Fist, the text claims that many construction projects destroyed some valuable artifacts and there is no control on construction projects in the united kingdom. The professor refutes this claim by saying that based on the rules, if a company wants to do a construction project on a cite, must let archeologists examine the place first, and if the cite was valuable, they should make some plans to preserve artifacts and document them properly.
Second, the text explains that there is not adequate financial supports for archaeological projects and a change in government priorities decreased the amount of funds of these projects. The professor goes against this claim and says that as an approved rule in the united kingdom, all construction companies must pay adequate funds for archaeological projects, and all examination projects and preserving artifacts must be supported by these companies. She also states that this rule provided lots of financial aids for archaeological projects, and let scientists to do far range of researches.
Third, the text claims that archaeology is a hard career, and there are not many job positions for the scientists in this field, and the people who want to work in this field usually do some unpaid works. The professor rejects this point and says that it is not like the past, and now all archaeological projects are paid works which did not exist before. She states that all the process of examination of cites, processing data and publishing them are supported by the government and can be done more professionally.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-08-04 | ayumiyazaki | 75 | view |
| 2024-08-04 | ayumiyazaki | 75 | view |
| 2024-01-25 | saamaan | 90 | view |
| 2024-01-07 | saba.es | 80 | view |
| 2023-11-16 | TiOluwani97 | 87 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, second, so, third, kind of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 7.30242825607 233% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1621.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 314.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16242038217 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20951839842 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9532666397 2.5805825403 114% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.503184713376 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 477.9 419.366225166 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.51434878587 462% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 31.0 21.2450331126 146% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 45.6671654474 49.2860985944 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 162.1 110.228320801 147% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.4 21.698381199 145% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.2 7.06452816374 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.238604806351 0.272083759551 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103641361226 0.0996497079465 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0884953994552 0.0662205650399 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.158103790305 0.162205337803 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.079461049975 0.0443174109184 179% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.6 13.3589403974 139% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.47 53.8541721854 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.24 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 10.498013245 137% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.