Integrated writing (TPO 47)
In the reading section, the writer claims that several arguments have been made against the powered flight of Pterosaurs which were an ancient group of winged reptiles including their slow metabolism, their high weights, and lack of strong back muscles in their legs. However, in the lecture, the professor casts doubt on these points and states that we have solid evidence which proves that the Pterosaurs were capable of powered flight
First of all, the writer mentions that some doubters point out that since pterosaurs were like cold-blooded animals, they have slow metabolism and they were unable to produce a lot of energy for powered flights. In contrast, the lecturer contends that scientist found hair like furs on the body of pterosaurs. This fact shows that they were like warm-blooded animals and had higher metabolism than we previously taught; as a result, they could produce sufficient energy for powered flights.
Furthermore, contrary to the idea in the reading part suggesting that Pterosaurs were very heavy that they would not have been able to flap their wings fast enough to stay afloat, the professor asserts that nowadays we know that from the anatomical perspective Pterosaurs was lighter than we taught. Their bones were hollow in the core and light-weighted, so they could flap their wings and jump and become afloat in the air.
Additionally, even though the writer claims that the back muscles in the back of the legs of pterosaurs were weak, so they could not take off by using their legs, the professor mentions that there are clear difference between the birds and pterosaurs for taking off. Pterosaurs used all of their four legs to run or jump, so they could produce enough energy to take off. Moreover, nowadays, we can see that animals such as bats use this method successfully to take off from the ground. Thus, pterosaurs could use this method too.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 438, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...terosaurs were capable of powered flight First of all, the writer mentions that s...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, so, thus, in contrast, such as, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 22.412803532 174% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1576.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 315.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00317460317 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48865402196 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 145.348785872 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520634920635 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 457.2 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => 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: 31.0 21.2450331126 146% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 104.264135732 49.2860985944 212% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 157.6 110.228320801 143% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.5 21.698381199 145% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0 7.06452816374 142% => 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 : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.537846599583 0.272083759551 198% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.205647813962 0.0996497079465 206% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.117290669823 0.0662205650399 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.320704124158 0.162205337803 198% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0554450700556 0.0443174109184 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.9 13.3589403974 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.47 53.8541721854 90% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.31 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 26.5 10.7273730684 247% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 14.4 10.498013245 137% => OK
text_standard: 27.0 11.2008830022 241% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.