The reading and the lecture are both about the ways that Agnostids lived before they became extinct. The author of the reading believes that Agnostids lived similar to other primitive arthropods, since their fossils give a clear evidence. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the reading. She thinks that the behavior and the way Agnostids lived are not similar to other arthropods.
First of all, the author claims that the agnostids are swimming predators that hunts small animals. He believes that since, other primitive arthropods were swimming predators, so there is a reasonable evidence that agnostids are strong swimming predators. This point is challenged by the lecturer. She thinks that agnostids are not swimming predators. Furthermore, she points out that most of the agnostids had small eyes and some are even blind, but the primitive arthropods had larger eyes for them to catch predators easily.
Secondly, the author states that agnostids may have dwelled on the seafloor. He argues that other types of primitive arthropods lived in this way, so agnostids may also lived in the same way. This argument is rebutted by the lecturer. She suggests that seafloor dwellers does not have the ability to move fast and they always go around a small geographical area. She elaborates on this by mentioning that agnostids moves much more faster and travel around a larger geographical area.
Finally, the author mentions that there is a possibility that agnostids were parasites. He is of the opinion that many species of the modern day arthropods are parasites. The lecturer, on the other hand, feels that parasite population of arthropods is very small. She puts forth the idea that agnostid population is very high, so the theory made in the reading rules out.
- TPO-09 - Integrated Writing Task Car manufacturers and governments have been eagerly seeking a replacement for the automobile's main source of power, the internal-combustion engine. By far the most promising alternative source of energy for cars is the hy 76
- TPO-18 - Integrated Writing Task 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 wi 61
- TPO-09 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Technology has made children less creative than they were in the past. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
- TPO-11 - Independent Writing Task Some people say that the Internet provides people with a lot of valuable information. Others think access to much information creates problems. Which view do you agree with?Use specific reasons and examples to support you 60
- TPO-04 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?In twenty years there will be fewer cars in use than there are today.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 240, 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.
...ce their fossils give a clear evidence. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made...
^^^
Line 5, column 427, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'faster' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: faster
...by mentioning that agnostids moves much more faster and travel around a larger geographical...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, furthermore, may, second, secondly, so, well, first of all, in the same way, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 22.412803532 156% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1501.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 292.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1404109589 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60061872844 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.479452054795 0.540411800872 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 462.6 419.366225166 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 3.25607064018 338% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.9147223844 49.2860985944 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.3888888889 110.228320801 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.2222222222 21.698381199 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.72222222222 7.06452816374 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.523079377261 0.272083759551 192% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.164163107025 0.0996497079465 165% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.094221533612 0.0662205650399 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.309237372675 0.162205337803 191% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0467669373295 0.0443174109184 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.