Tpo32
In this set of material, the lecture and the article disagree on the merit of the source of quackers sounds which the Russian submarines hear them while patrolling the North Atlantic and the Arctic Ocean. The reading passage suggests three theories explaining the moving fast sounds. In contrary, the professor in the lecture challenges these ideas and proves they are not feasible. Following is a brief explanation of his perspective.
First of all, the passage states that the weird sounds could be the calls of males and female Ocra whales submarine animal which inhabit that area. Based on the extensive studies of that sub-animal, the author believes that the female attract her mate in the similar voice of that noise. However, the lecture opposed this idea of the passage. He asserts that it is plausible to this Whales to create that sound in that area, but the sounds of them produced near the surface of the ocean which is impossible to hear it with that bright voice from above the surface.
Secondly, the reading claims that this sound caused from a giant squid submarine as particular kind of frogs. Furthermore, there is not that much study to that species of frogs, but the sound could be from them. On the other hand, continue listening passage refutes this theory. It points out that those squids live in that area for centuries, and the first recording of that sounds was at 1960 and continued for two decades, after that the voice suddenly disappeared. In fact, there is no reason to the disappearance of that noise while the animals still living there. It is clearly for the lecturer that the voice is not from those frogs.
Finally, the reading passage suggests that this strange sound could be an undetected advanced technological device which creates a free sound similar to the frog's voice. Whereas, the professor casts doubt this theory. He elaborates that there is no device invented that does not include a noise of its engine. Moreover, there is no technology in the past capable of developing such a quiet engine in the submarine environment. Therefore, this theory is unconvincing also.
All in all, the lecture rebuffs the three arguments of the article and explains why they are detrimental.
- Question: Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific points made in the reading passage 80
- Essay topics: Universities should require students to take courses only within those fields they are interested in studying. 50
- Some people prefer to live in places that have the same weather or climate all years long. Others like to live in the weather changes several times a year.Which one do you prefer?give specific reasons and examples to support your idea. 90
- People these days spend too much time for their personal enjoyment. Do you agree or disagree, give specific reasons and examplesto support your view. 70
- Tpo 28 74
Comments
Essay evaluation report
the source of quackers sounds which the Russian submarines hear them while patrolling the North Atlantic
the source of quackers sounds which the Russian submarines hear while patrolling the North Atlantic //don't need 'them' again
which inhabit that area.
which inhabit at that area.
the female attract her mate
the female attracts her mate
it is plausible to this Whales to create that sound in that area
it is plausible to this Whale to create that sound in that area
but the sounds of them produced near the surface of the ocean
but the sounds of them are produced near the surface of the ocean
while the animals still living there.
while the animals are still living there.
the professor casts doubt this theory.
the professor casts doubt on this theory.
flaws:
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Words: 376 350
Be sensitive to use 'that'
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 23 in 30
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 376 350
No. of Characters: 1807 1500
No. of Different Words: 187 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.403 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.806 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.423 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 122 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 90 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 53 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.8 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.548 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.65 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.28 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.461 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.073 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 378, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...age. He asserts that it is plausible to this Whales to create that sound in that are...
^^^^
Line 4, column 170, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... free sound similar to the frogs voice. Whereas, the professor casts doubt this theory....
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 466, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END[1]
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
... Therefore, this theory is unconvincing also. All in all, the lecture rebuffs the t...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'furthermore', 'however', 'moreover', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'still', 'therefore', 'whereas', 'while', 'in fact', 'kind of', 'first of all', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.239130434783 0.229887763892 104% => OK
Verbs: 0.132850241546 0.158761421928 84% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0700483091787 0.0866891130778 81% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0434782608696 0.046263068375 94% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0338164251208 0.0685040099705 49% => OK
Prepositions: 0.13768115942 0.118717715034 116% => OK
Participles: 0.0217391304348 0.0351676179071 62% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.51725597366 2.67179642975 94% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0144927536232 0.0309702414327 47% => Some infinitives wanted.
Particles: 0.0024154589372 0.00188951952338 128% => OK
Determiners: 0.173913043478 0.0887237588012 196% => Less determiners wanted.
Modal_auxiliary: 0.00724637681159 0.0209618222197 35% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.012077294686 0.0139019557991 87% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2223.0 2387.08602151 93% => OK
No of words: 376.0 408.028673835 92% => OK
Chars per words: 5.91223404255 5.86048508987 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40348946061 4.48200974243 98% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.340425531915 0.338922669872 100% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.25 0.251872472559 99% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.156914893617 0.174417080927 90% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.103723404255 0.112833075102 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51725597366 2.67179642975 94% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 212.727598566 91% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.51329787234 0.524397521467 98% => OK
Word variations: 55.6338098942 59.2087087015 94% => OK
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6684587814 97% => OK
Sentence length: 18.8 20.5533526081 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.5858507732 48.84282405 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.15 120.699889404 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8 20.5533526081 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.9 0.644075263715 140% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.5376344086 110% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.54480286738 54% => OK
Readability: 43.8 45.7405998639 96% => OK
Elegance: 1.89655172414 1.45489161554 130% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.300154397459 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0973891423088 0.103427244359 94% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.080749604566 0.0752933317313 107% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.572404970637 0.497263757937 115% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.200258767085 0.151897553556 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.114077575197 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0781384742642 0% => The sentences are too close to each other.
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.476215558571 0.336927656856 141% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.166275323453 0.067059652881 248% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.210909579961 0% => The content is off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0618886996521 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 11.8870967742 67% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.86379928315 155% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.91756272401 122% => OK
Positive topic words: 1.0 8.42114695341 12% => More positive topic words wanted.
Negative topic words: 3.0 2.4623655914 122% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.75985663082 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 4.0 13.6433691756 29% => More topic words wanted.
---------------------
Rates: 61.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.5 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations to cover all aspects.