TPO 30 Integrated Writing Task

Both article and lecturer are discussing about Greeks defending themselves by a mirror as a weapon against Romans. the article tried to demonstrate that it is nothing but a mythical story. but the lecturer is fully disagree and tries to justify his point of view with reasoning.
The articles mentioned that, the Greeks did not have sufficient technology to invent such a high-tech devise. because it is way too difficult to design that kind of huge mirror with a lot of elaborations in size and and curvature. On the other hand, the lecturer is not agreed and believes that Greeks had access to enough copper and also had knowledge to create dozens of copper plates wich can aggregatly act like a huge mirror.
Secondly, in the article it is said that it is impossible because this process is really slow and impractical to waste so much time burning Roman's ships this way. but the lecturer comes up with the idea that Roman ships is consist of wooden parts wich can be burned in about 10 minutes, but there was also a material named pitch wich catches fire really fast in seconds.
At last, the article thinks that using this kind of strategy is unnecessary because they already have flaming arrows to burn and destroy their opponents ships. But the lecturer disagrees, and says using flaming arrows might be efficient but it is predictable. but burning them with mirror using light beams is much more effective because no one expects it and all they can see is just a mirror and reflection.

Votes
Average: 4 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

but the lecturer is fully disagree...(wrong)
but the lecturer fully disagrees... (correct)
========================

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 22 in 30
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 6 12
No. of Words: 261 250
No. of Characters: 1214 1200
No. of Different Words: 148 150
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.019 4.2
Average Word Length: 4.651 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.417 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 87 80
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 59 60
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 35 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 23 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 43.5 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.829 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 1 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.481 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.481 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.119 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 4