ddddd
The reading passage and the lecture offer opposing views regarding the dinosaurs. While the author of the article presents three evidences to support the idea that dinosaurs were endotherms, the professor in the lecture claims that those facts in the writing do not prove endothermy of the dinosaurs.
To begin with, the author of the article argues that discovery of dinosaur fossils in polar region indicates that they were endotherms. However, the professor in the lecture claims that polar regions, at the time when dinosaur lived there, were much warmer than they are today. He adds that dinosaur could have used the strategy of migrating to another suitable place or hibernating to survive in that polar region, and hence discovery of their fossil does not necessarily prove that they were endotherms.
Secondly, the writer of the article suggests that the position of legs below the body, which is typical to endotherm animals, justifies that dinosaurs were endotherms. Although it is stated in the passage that dinosaurs' legs are located below their body to enable them to run efficiently, the professor in the lecture contradicts that this position of the legs were for supporting more body weight. Being large is advantageous to dinosaurs, and this particular leg position enables the dinosaurs to go big in terms of the size of the body, according to him.
Finally, the professor refutes the idea of the passage that the presence of Haversian canals indicates that dinosaurs were endotherms. He states that in addition to Haversian canals, dinosaurs had growth rings, which means dinosaurs had undergone through periodical growth that is characteristic to the non-endotherms.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 559, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...the size of the body, according to him. Finally, the professor refutes the idea ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, hence, however, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, while, in addition, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 19.0 12.0772626932 157% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1422.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 270.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26666666667 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74525154324 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.496296296296 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 444.6 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 21.2450331126 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 45.4867013533 49.2860985944 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.2 110.228320801 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.0 21.698381199 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.5 7.06452816374 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 13.3589403974 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 53.8541721854 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.0289183223 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.95 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.498013245 122% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.