The reading and the lecture are both about the manner that agnostids might have lived before they became extinct. The author mentions three theories including considering them as predators, scavengers, and parasites that researchers have proposed until now. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. She believes that all of the mentioned theories have flaws and cannot be approved.
First of all, the author claims that agnostids were presumably predator and used to hunt smaller animals. This point is challenged by the lecturer. She says that predators have large eyes with a strong vision to chase preys, however, agnositids have had tiny poor eyes and even they were blind. In addition, they had not any other sensory organs which makes them to sense and chase the preys. As a result, considering them as predators does not make sense at all.
Secondly, the author states that agnostids may have lived on the seefloor and feed on dead organisms. This argument is rebutted by the lecturer. She suggests that animals living on the seafloor move slow and they are typically localized in a small area, however, according to the evidence, agnostids used to live on a vast area which points out that they were able to move fast and go large distances.
Finally, the author mentions that agnostids may have lived as parasites feeding from a host. The lecturer, on the other hand, feels that it is impossible because the number of parasites feeding from a host is certainly limited, otherwise the parasites may kill the host. This implies that the number of agnostids have been too small, while the evidence reject this theory and indicate to the large number of agnostids.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 259, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...at researchers have proposed until now. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made...
^^^
Line 2, column 337, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
... made in the article. She believes that all of the mentioned theories have flaws and canno...
^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'finally', 'first', 'however', 'may', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'while', 'in addition', 'as a result', 'first of all', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.231012658228 0.261695866417 88% => OK
Verbs: 0.189873417722 0.158904122519 119% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0601265822785 0.0723426182421 83% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0506329113924 0.0435111971325 116% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0379746835443 0.0277247811725 137% => OK
Prepositions: 0.126582278481 0.128828473217 98% => OK
Participles: 0.0569620253165 0.0370669169778 154% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.44866962653 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0221518987342 0.0208969081088 106% => OK
Particles: 0.00316455696203 0.00154638098197 205% => OK
Determiners: 0.123417721519 0.128158765124 96% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0158227848101 0.0158828679856 100% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00632911392405 0.0114777025283 55% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1696.0 1645.83664459 103% => OK
No of words: 284.0 271.125827815 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.97183098592 6.08160592843 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.04852973271 101% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.334507042254 0.374372842146 89% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.246478873239 0.287516216867 86% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.211267605634 0.187439937562 113% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.133802816901 0.113142543107 118% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44866962653 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538732394366 0.539623497131 100% => OK
Word variations: 54.3665873086 53.8517498576 101% => OK
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0529801325 115% => OK
Sentence length: 18.9333333333 21.7502111507 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.477967004 49.3711431718 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.066666667 132.220823453 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.9333333333 21.7502111507 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.866666666667 0.878197800319 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.39072847682 59% => OK
Readability: 43.5812206573 50.5018328374 86% => OK
Elegance: 1.48863636364 1.90840788429 78% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.627487722701 0.549887131256 114% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.105317051637 0.142949733639 74% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.110085087061 0.0787303798458 140% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.551304293763 0.631733273073 87% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.166813032332 0.139662658121 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.262498644235 0.266732575781 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107023064499 0.103435571967 103% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.360953209375 0.414875509568 87% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0339596756138 0.0530846634433 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.450659715322 0.40443939384 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0601913354036 0.0528353158467 114% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 4.33554083885 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.26048565121 164% => OK
Positive topic words: 0.0 3.49668874172 0% => More positive topic words wanted.
Negative topic words: 5.0 3.62251655629 138% => OK
Neutral topic words: 5.0 3.1766004415 157% => OK
Total topic words: 10.0 10.2958057395 97% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.