Both the reading passage and lecture discuss a type of behavior called altruism. The former argues that some animals and individual behaviors are related to altruism for some reasons. But the latter contradicts each of these points.
First of all, the author of the passage claims that individuals who donate organs or share his or her food with another person behave altruistically. However, the lecturer contends that they gain rewards for these behaviors. For instance, a person who donates his kidney to someone else receives appreciation and approval from public. These non-material rewards are more important for some people.
Second of all, the text asserts that animals also sacrifice food or their lives with the aim of helping other members of the group. The author supports his position by giving examples from meerkat. This animal stands as a guard without any gains, such as food. In contrast, the listening counters that the latest researches show that they eat before standing as a guard. Thus, their stomachs are already full when others are eating.
Finally, the author brings his argument to a close by suggesting that meerkats sacrifice their lives in order to save their friends. It does that by alerting others with alarm cry and then running alone. Again, the speaker specifically addresses this point and states that the research reveals that if preditor comes, guardian meerkat run immediately. By doing this, it also endangers other members. Additionally, when others begin running, predator gives attention toward them. Thus, guardian meerkat increases its own chance.
To sum up, it is clear that both the writer and professor hold conflicting views about altruistic behavior.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 233, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...latter contradicts each of these points. First of all, the author of the passage ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, second, so, then, thus, for instance, in contrast, such as, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1446.0 1373.03311258 105% => OK
No of words: 272.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31617647059 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55382159866 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.650735294118 0.540411800872 120% => OK
syllable_count: 427.5 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.3810523469 49.2860985944 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 80.3333333333 110.228320801 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.1111111111 21.698381199 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.83333333333 7.06452816374 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.216189301011 0.272083759551 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0582053728534 0.0996497079465 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0670257184277 0.0662205650399 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112810608318 0.162205337803 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0854829735052 0.0443174109184 193% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 13.3589403974 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.98 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.08 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 63.6247240618 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.