Dr. Byrnes’ TOEFL Integrated Essay Evaluation
Student essay
This essay would likely score about 23 on the actual test because it has good grammar and no spelling errors. However, while most sentences are correct, there are several issues with word choice, article usage, and pronoun-antecedent agreement, which sometimes make the meaning unclear. These are mistakes that grammar checkers or AIs may not always catch. In addition to these language issues, the essay also shows weaknesses in topic development. The explanations are often brief or superficial, and some points from the reading and lecture are not accurately or fully explained. The essay is a reasonable length, but much of the content is repetitive rather than detailed or well-supported. To reach a score of 25 or higher, focus on clearly understanding each claim and providing precise, well-developed explanations for both the reading and the lecture.
Detailed Problems with the easy
The reading passage and the lecture present contrasting perspectives regarding the Plain of Jars. Specifically, the author proposes three theories about the actual function of those Plain of Jars, whereas the lecturer casts doubts on each one.
Problems
confusing (how many involved in the discussion: reading passage, lecture, author, lecturer - 4 agents here?)
too general, must be specific: not about the jar's existence, but the function of the jars
redundant: the second sentence has no new info.
To begin with, the reading passage suggests that these jars were used for fermenting food or drinks for special events, such as victories. The lecturer, on the other hand, disputes this theory, pointing out that fermentation is easier using clay jars, while Plain of Jars are made from stones which are harder and more time-consuming to construct. There is no logical reason to use these stone jars for fermentation when there is an easier substitution like clay jars that serve the same function.
Problems
missing words for clarity: “such as celebrating victories”
must provide evidence or reason for the claims.
Why the function = fermentation device?
Answer: based on local legend that a king ordered to construct the jars to ferment a celebratory victory
“on the other hand” requires “on the one hand”: use “however” or don't use at all as “disputes” already signals contrast (avoid redundancy: aim for adding new info)
Not logical, unclear, and the comparison incorrect: “fermentation is easier using clay jars, while Plain of Jars are made from stones which are harder (what does “harder” mean in this context) and more time-consuming to construct.”
fermentation function-wise, the lecture says the same. what’s different is the energy expended to make them.
Furthermore, the reading contends that these jars were used to store water to serve travelers who were trading during the dry seasons. However, the professor challenges this theory, mentioning that trade routes were actually near areas where there are lakes and rivers, sources that trade travelers can get fresh water access from, unlike the stored water found in jars.
Problems:
wrong transition. "furthermore" makes the idea continuous to the first point, fermentation. Just say “another function, according to the reading is…”
reason for why the jars = water source for passing by traders? answer = "the jars were near the trade routes" must be mentioned to be logical.
"The" missing
not any trade routes, but specific trade routes, so need “the trade routes”
“areas” restrictively modified so needs "the areas"
not any trade travelers, but specific to the areas that time => "the trade travelers"
ideas not connected logically: “rivers, sources” => "rivers, thus becoming the sources …”
tense and mode mistakes: "can" => "could." All the suggested ideas are conjectures of the past event. not actually happened in the past. so must use past indicating modal auxiliary verbs and past perfect form; like "could," "would," "might" + "have" + pp)
“ unlike the stored water found in jars” doesn't make sense
Finally, the text mentions another theory about using the Plain of Jars as an ancient burial site, since their size is large enough to have human body inside them, and hold their valuable items as in ancient cultures. Nevertheless, the lecturer argues that in the ancient cultures who used jars as tombs, they had covers to protect the bodies and their valuable jewelries from being stolen, but the Plain of Jars did not have these types of covers. Therefore, this contradicts the theory of using these jars as burial sites.
Problems
Redundant, not logical, misrepresentation:
Why the jars = tombs?
Answer = large enough to hold a dead body + some artifacts found in some jars. Burying a body and artifacts was commonly practiced in many ancient cultures.
Number disagreement:
human body inside them (one body cut up into pieces and buried?) => human bodies inside them
Pronoun ambiguity:
their size => the size of the jars
inside them => inside the jars
hold the valuable of the deceased people => hold the valuables of the deceased people
in the ancient cultures who => in the ancient cultures those who
they had covers => the jars had covers
their valuable jewelries => the valuable jewelries of the dead people
Inadequate word choices:
“contradicts” too strong, there is no contradiction, just insufficient evidence (hint: “unlikely” in the lecture)
Use “argues” for punchlines, i.e., claim. Use words like “points out,” “mentions,” “explains” for just facts.
Misrepresentation: “the Plain of Jars did not have these types of covers.” We don't know this for certain: we just couldn't find any covers. Doesn’t imply jars didn't have such covers.
Use periods, not commas when introducing different ideas (rule: one idea one sentence). For example,
In response, the lecturer explains that, in the ancient cultures of those who used jars as tombs, the jars had covers. The covers were used to protect not only the dead bodies but also to prevent the valuable jewelry buried with the bodies from being stolen. The lecturer then points out that no covers for the Plain of Jars have been found. Therefore, the professor argues (or concludes) that the tomb theory of the jars is implausible.
Dr. Byrnes’ Revised Essay based on the comments
The reading presents three theories about the function of the jars at the Plain of Jars, an archaeological site in Laos. The lecturer, however, refutes all of these theories.
One theory is that these jars were used as fermentation containers. This idea is based on a local legend, which claims that an ancient king ordered the creation of the jars to ferment beverages for celebrations, such as military victories. The lecturer disputes this theory by pointing out that fermentation can be equally well done with clay jars, which are much easier to make than stone jars. Given the energy required to create stone jars, the professor argues that it would not make sense to use stone jars for fermentation when a more convenient option like clay jars could serve the same purpose.
Another theory is that these jars were used to store water for thirsty trade travelers passing by. This theory is based on the fact that the site of the jars is near ancient trade routes. Challenging this idea, the lecturer points out that the trade routes were near areas with abundant water sources, such as lakes and rivers. Therefore, the professor contends that it is highly unlikely that the jars were used to store water for travelers.
The third theory is that the jars must have been tombs to bury the deceased. The evidence for this theory is that the jars are large enough to contain human bodies, and artifacts have been found inside some of the jars. This latter evidence is significant because many ancient cultures buried valuable items with the deceased. In response, the lecturer explains that in the ancient cultures where jars were used as tombs, the jars typically had coverings to protect both the body and valuable items from theft. Since no covers have been found at the Plain of Jars, the lecturer concludes that it is unlikely the jars were used as tombs. Therefore, the professor argues that none of the theories in the reading are valid.
Revised essay score
26–28 by ChatGPT
28–30 out of 30 by Perplexity
26-28 by Gemini
Why not 30: This essay demonstrates a clear understanding of the source material and presents it in a clear, well-organized manner with good writing skills. This aligns with the criteria for a high score. However, reaching the absolute top score of 30 signifies a level of mastery in linguistic precision, seamless integration of information, and rhetorical sophistication at the advanced native writers.
Dr. Byrnes' TOEFL Writing Course
TPO 59
Lecture
Listen to part of a lecture on the topic you just read about. Despite what you just read, the plane of jars is actually quite mysterious. The purpose of the jars is still uncertain. First, the fermentation theory is probably not true. In Laos, pots that are traditionally used to ferment drinks are made of clay. You could use stone jars for fermentation too, but frankly, creating stone jars is difficult. Creating stone containers is much more time-consuming and expensive than making containers from clay. Why would ancient people have expended all this effort on creating stone jars for fermentation, when clay pots were easier to make and could have served the same purpose just as effectively? Second, it's unlikely that the jars were created for the purpose of storing water for travelers. Although the jars were located near ancient trade routes, these routes were also close to rivers and streams. People who were traveling near a river probably had no need for an additional source of fresh water, so it's unlikely that the jars would have been used for this purpose. Third, the large size of the jars and the presence of tools, beads and jewelry in some jars suggests that the jars may have been used as tombs for burying human remains. But there is one serious problem with this theory. Tombs are usually covered in order to protect the human remains and artifacts that are buried alongside them from the weather, from thieves, and so on. But the stone jars found in the plain of jars do not have any covers. No one has found any type of cover either on the jars themselves or nearby. Without covers to protect the human remains, it's unlikely that the jars were used as tombs.
Reading
The Plain of Jars is an archaeological site in the Southeast Asian country of Laos. At the site, hundreds of large stone jars, ranging in size from one to three meters, are scattered across the countryside These numerous large containers are around 2,000 years old. The original purpose of the jars is unknown, but archaeologists have several theories. First, the jars may have been used for fermentation. In fermentation, food or drink is left in a sealed container in order to undergo a chemical change According to some local residents, the jars were originally constructed by a king in order to ferment a special beverage to celebrate a great victory It would be possible to use the jars for fermentation, so the local people's story could be true. Second, the jars may have been used for water storage. Laos experiences rainy and dry seasons, and finding water during the dry seasons can be difficult. The Plain of Jars is located near ancient trade routes, where traveling traders may have needed drinking water. The jars could have been constructed to collect water during the rainy season so that traders passing through the area would have a source of drinking water during the dry seas on Third, it is possible that the Plain of Jars was an ancient burial site, and the jars were tombs (places where human remains are deposited). Much of the contents of the ancient jars is now gone, but they are large enough to hold human remains. Furthermore, artifacts such as metal tools, jewelry, and glass beads have been found in some of the jars. Burying the dead alongside valuable artifacts was a common practice in ancient cultures. Ancient people may have buried their dead in the jars along with the artifacts