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.
Both, the reading and the lecture, talk about the situation of the science of archaeology in the twenty century. The reading claims that it faced important issues and limitations in Britain, whereas the lecturer has a counter opinion. she says that in 1990 the government release new measurements enhancing that situation. Furthermore, she refutes each reason presented, casting doubts in the author's beliefs.
Firstly, the reading points out that an elevated number of articles were destroyed during the construction' works. Notwithstanding, the orator disproves this idea by saying, that the new guidelines establish clearly that every place should be examined by archaeologists before any work begin. With that, they have the possibility to know if exist some of archaeological interest in the area and creating a conservation plan with the local authorities and the construction company.
Secondly, the test's author argues that the financial support for archaeology was incorrect, owing to the major part of the capital come from the government and grants. Nonetheless, the professor mentions that, with the new rules, construction companies have to pay for the initial archaeological inspection of the lands and any other work of preservation that should be carried out. this capital allows to exam new sites of interest; which this argument falls apart.
Finally, the reading remarks that it was complicated to get a career in archaeology, because those jobs were found by universities or the government and there were not too many of them available. However, the professor highlights the weakness of this point by noticing that, under the new regulations, more specialists in archaeologist are needed and, as a result, there are more positions available. Therefore, the number of graduated in that discipline is higher than ever before, which help the preservation of the patrimony.
- TPO 21 3
- TOEFL T P O 18 - Integrated Writing Task, extinction of the Torreya Taxifoha 3
- In the 1950s Torreya taxifoha, a type of evergreen tree once very common in the state of Florida, started to die out. No one is sure exactly what caused the decline, but chances are good that if nothing is done, Torreya will soon become extinct. Experts a 3
- Function of the buildings in Chaco Canyon’s settlement. 86
- Every year, forest fires and severe storms cause a great deal of damage to forests in the northwestern United States. One way of dealing with the aftermath of these disasters is called salvage logging, which is the practice of removing dead trees from aff 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 236, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...eas the lecturer has a counter opinion. she says that in 1990 the government releas...
^^^
Line 9, column 384, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: This
...reservation that should be carried out. this capital allows to exam new sites of int...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, whereas, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 30.3222958057 132% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 5.01324503311 279% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1610.0 1373.03311258 117% => OK
No of words: 294.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.47619047619 5.08290768461 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07467942561 2.5805825403 119% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.605442176871 0.540411800872 112% => OK
syllable_count: 485.1 419.366225166 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.1643577773 49.2860985944 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.846153846 110.228320801 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6153846154 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 7.06452816374 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
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: 0.0353281957312 0.272083759551 13% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.011066032777 0.0996497079465 11% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0152397024048 0.0662205650399 23% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0202924946828 0.162205337803 13% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0088211206136 0.0443174109184 20% => 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: 15.7 13.3589403974 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 53.8541721854 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.0289183223 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.8 12.2367328918 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.4 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 63.6247240618 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.