Tpo43
The reading and the lecture both talk about agnostids. Agnostids were marine animals which extinct about 450 million years ago. The reading gives three theory about how agnostids may have lived; however, the lecture states that all the three theory are weak.
Firstly, they discuss free-swimming predators. The author claims that agnostids ate smaller sea animals. The speaker, on the other hand, says that it can not possible because the eyes. Predators should have well eyes, but agnostids sometimes were blind. Therefore, they can not be a predator.
Secondly, the writer argues that some type of primitive arthropods dwelled on the seafloor so agnostids may have did too. In contrast, the professor states that all the seafloor animals have not the ability to moving fast, nontheless, agnostids could move very fast. It is obvious from the fossils and the place they were discovered.
Finally, the reading suggests that the agnostids were parasites and feeding from large animals. Nevertheless, the lecturer states that parasites do not have a very large population, on the contrary scientists know which agnostids lived in a large population.
All in all, the reading claims that the three theory how agnostids may have lived. However, the professor says that the reasons mentioned in the passage are not persuasive.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-10-06 | Aliakbari94 | 80 | view |
| 2021-10-05 | Aliakbari94 | 70 | view |
| 2021-03-02 | taisuke571 | 85 | view |
| 2020-10-31 | nj-me | 70 | view |
| 2020-10-25 | 想不到一个好名字 | 80 | view |
- tpo-42-Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific solutions proposed in the reading passage. 60
- to-44- Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific theories presented in the reading passage. 3
- tpo-47 68
- TPO- 47 61
- tpo-32- Summaries the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they case doubt on specific points made in the reading passage. 65
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The reading and the lecture both talk ab...
^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...es that all the three theory are weak. Firstly, they discuss free-swimming pred...
^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...Therefore, they can not be a predator. Secondly, the writer argues that some ty...
^^^
Line 3, column 117, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'done'.
Suggestion: done
...d on the seafloor so agnostids may have did too. In contrast, the professor states ...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s and the place they were discovered. Finally, the reading suggests that the a...
^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...gnostids lived in a large population. All in all, the reading claims that the ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, however, may, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, in contrast, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 14.0 30.3222958057 46% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1115.0 1373.03311258 81% => OK
No of words: 211.0 270.72406181 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28436018957 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.81127787577 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55293236668 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 115.0 145.348785872 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.545023696682 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 336.6 419.366225166 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.715293954 49.2860985944 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 74.3333333333 110.228320801 67% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.0666666667 21.698381199 65% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.6 7.06452816374 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.27373068433 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.494813218231 0.272083759551 182% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.157694615535 0.0996497079465 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0930686816597 0.0662205650399 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.261759130427 0.162205337803 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0598074711522 0.0443174109184 135% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 53.8541721854 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 11.0289183223 80% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.75 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 63.6247240618 85% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 4.5 10.7273730684 42% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.