Integrated essay (234 words), 20 minutes

The reading and the lecture are both about Pluto's status in our Solar System. The reading points
out that the decision of considering Pluto as a Dward Planet and, thus, not being part of our Solar Commented [IP1]: Spelling mistake
System, indicates the advance of science and argues that this decision is accepted by wide-range Commented [IP2]: Why capitalised?
audiences. The lecture casts doubts on this by establishing that this decision could not be fair for
both, the public and the Astronomers' society. Commented [IP3]: Not necessary.

First of all, the author claims that the decision of regarding Pluto as not being part of our Solar
System, was casted by a democratic votation among Astronomers. However, the lecture rebuts Commented [IP4]: poll
this argument by suggesting that less than 10% of the Astronomers emmited their vote in the Commented [IP5]: voted
process to take this decision.

Secondly, the reading posits that there are some objective factors that enables us to know if a Commented [IP6]: wrong verb form
cosmic object is or is not a planet. For instance, its definition considers factors like the size of the
object. This point is challenged by the lecture that hints out that there is no a general and Commented [IP7]: Not necessary
accepted definition for a planet.

Finally, the acticle says that this decision has been generaly accepted by the public in general. The Commented [IP8]: typo
lecturer rebuts this argument by stating that Pluto, as a planet, is popular among children, and it Commented [IP9]: Spelling mistake
posits that there are people fighting to keep considering Pluto as a planet.

Revised:

The reading and the lecture are both about Pluto's status in our Solar System. The reading points
out that the decision of considering Pluto as a dwarf Planet and, thus, not being part of our Solar Commented [IP10]: Unnecessary capitalisation
System, indicates the advance of science and argues that this decision is accepted by wide-range
audiences. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. He thinks that this decision
could not be fair for both, the public and the Astronomers' society. Commented [IP11]: Why did you change the original?

First of all, the author of the reading claims that the decision of regarding Pluto not as part of our Commented [IP12]: Why did you change it?
Solar System, was casted by voting among Astronomers at the International Astronomical Union
Conference in 2006. However, the lecturer rebuts this argument. He suggests that less than 10% of Commented [IP13]: I agree with this change. The
the Astronomers emitted their vote in the process of taking this decision. sentence is clearer.
Commented [IP14]: ‘cast their vote’ or simply ‘voted’
Secondly, the reading posits that there are some objective factors that let us know if a cosmic
object is or is not a planet. For instance, its definition considers factors like the size of the object.
This point is challenged by the lecturer. He hints out that, regarding the general definition for a
planet, not only Pluto but also the Earth could not be considered a planet, which casts doubts on Commented [IP15]: Why did you change the original?
this definition. Commented [IP16]: This is a different idea, and should be
state in a separate sentence beginning with a discourse
Finally, the article puts forth the idea that this decision has been accepted by the public in general. marker that indicates its relation with what was previously
The lecturer rebuts this argument. He states that Pluto, as a planet, is popular among children, and said.
he notes that there are people fighting to keep considering Pluto as a planet. Commented [IP17]: Nice! 😊
Commented [IP18]: Nice!! 😊
Commented [IP19]: Why did you change the original?