سلام دوستان عزیز( خصوصا saman-r )

لطفا به این integrated essay هم یه نگاهی بکنید
همگی موفق باشید

In this set of materials, the reading passage revolves around three theories regarding the usage of "great houses"; on the contrary, the professor is at the loggerheads with the author over the theories. He rules out all the explanations and states that none of the theories is convincing.

First, the reading passage argues that "great houses" were used for residential purpose, because they are similar to recent "apartment buildings". In contrast, the professor refutes this theory and declares that, it is true that the exterior of great houses is similar to "apartment buildings”. But the interior of the houses is quite different. If the houses were residential, there would have been many fire places but there are few of them. In one of the houses there are fire places for 10 families,(.) while there are rooms for 100 families. Thus the inside of the houses casts doubt on residential purpose of the houses.

Second, the author states that the houses were used as storage places for grain maize, since the size of the houses is suitable for this purpose. Conversely, the lecturer believes that this theory is not supported by evidence. If the houses were used for storing grain maize, there should have been traces of spilled maize or big containers; while the excavations from the houses have not revealed traces of extra maize or containers yet. So this theory is unsupportive by evidence.

Finally, the writer asserts that the houses were used as “ceremonial centers”. Because excavators found large number of broken pots at a mound near the houses and the pots may have been used as festive meal containers. In contrast, the speaker casts serious doubt on this theory and states that besides broken pots, there were found other materials like building materials and tools. So the mound was a place for dumping trash and the broken pots may have been regular trash, like construction workers meals’ containers.

1. Should I end each argument either reading or listening with sentence adverbs like so, Thus, therefore? Or this approach is only required for listening argument?