In contrast to the reading passage, which mentions three arguments and believes they are the strong support that Robert E. Peary has really reached the North Pole, the lecturer disagrees with the text about the credibility of the arguments. Followed are the three aspects where the two materials diverge from each other.
First of all, the lecturer pointed out that the committee put together by National Geographic Society was not objective, since the members of the committee were all Peary's closed friends or people who funded Peary for his journey. Also, the investigation held by the committee only lasted for two days, which is way too short to look into enough details to come out a convincing result. Therefore, the conclusion made by the committee cannot be taken as a solid evidence of Peary's journey to the North Pole. On the contrary, the passage believes the investigation done by the committee and take it as a strong support for the truth of Peary's claim.
Secondly, it is argued by the lecturer that doubts toward the speed of Peary’s journey to the North Pole cannot be cleared out by Tom Avery's journey, since these two explorers were taking their journeys under many different conditions. For example, Tom was traveling with a favorable weather condition while Peary was not. Also, Tom was carrying a lot lesser weight than Peary was since Tom’s foods were carried by airplanes. Under these circumstances, the speed of Tom Avery’s journey would be faster than Peary’s, so even if Tom had completed his journey with less than 37 days, it's still not convincing to take it as a proof to validate that the speed of Peary's journey was rational. In contrast, the reading passage suggests that the speed of Peary’s traveling can be proved valid by the experience of Tom Avery’s traveling.
Furthermore, the professor expresses that the photo taken by Peary cannot be used to analyze the sun position, since the photos were taken hundred years ago with poor techniques and the shadows in the photos were all unfocused and blurred, so it would definitely lead to inaccuracy of the analysis. On the other hand, the reading passage believes that those photos can become a solid evidence that Peary really did reach to the North Pole in the specific days judging from the sun positions.
In summary, the writer’s points of views are strongly challenged by the lecturer that the three arguments mentioned in the passage were invalid, and there’s still no evidence that Robert E. Peary has ever reached the North Pole.
- TPO-45 Integrated Writing Task 73
- All parents should be required to volunteer time to their children's schools. 62
- TOEFL T P O 28 - Integrated Writing Task 3
- 1.Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic regions. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of the year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed and cold enough, 49
- Imagine that you are in a classroom or a meeting. The teacher or the meeting leader says something incorrect In your opinion, which of the following is the best thing to do?•Interrupt and correct the mistake right away.•Wait until the class or meeting 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 215, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...lorers were taking their journeys under many different conditions. For example, Tom was travel...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 627, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'taking'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'convince' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: taking
... than 37 days, its still not convincing to take it as a proof to validate that the spee...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 140, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a hundred'.
Suggestion: a hundred
...n position, since the photos were taken hundred years ago with poor techniques and the ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, if, look, really, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, while, for example, in contrast, in summary, first of all, in contrast to, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 10.4613686534 210% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 30.3222958057 195% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2149.0 1373.03311258 157% => OK
No of words: 427.0 270.72406181 158% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.03278688525 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.04702891845 112% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66997821756 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 145.348785872 144% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.489461358314 0.540411800872 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 657.0 419.366225166 157% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 2.5761589404 349% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 21.2450331126 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 70.7557418165 49.2860985944 144% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.3125 110.228320801 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.6875 21.698381199 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.0625 7.06452816374 171% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => 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: 15.6 13.3589403974 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.62 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 63.6247240618 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.498013245 118% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.