The author in the reading states that the possible reason behind the decline of the sea otter population is environmental pollution; in contrast, the lecturer disagrees and has a different opinion: the probable rationale behind the decline is not the pollution but the attacks by predators - the orca.
First, the author states that the pollutant sources near the Alaskan coast have reduced the otter's resistance to dangerous infections which is leading to otter's death. However, the lecturer refutes this claim. She goes on to say that there were no dead bodies of otter found along the seacoast, if pollution was the reason, then they would have found the dead bodies. She holds that the predators killed and then feasted on these otters, and as result there were no bodies found on the coast.
Second, the author claims that the vast variety of other species were also found to be vulnerable, and their population also decreased. The pollutant had its effect on the entire habitat. Once again, the lecturer founds problem in the author's argument. She contends that the otters fed on these species; therefore, their population were also found to be declining.
Finally, the author posits that the uneven pattern of the otter death in certain location were found. These pollutants were unevenly concentrated due to the ocean currents or environmental factors, and these resulted in that pattern. However, the lecturer opposes this claim by explaining that the orca would come to the shallow waters to hunt the otters. Also, the pattern found showed the same thing - the population of the otters were more in the shallow regions than the deeper regions of the ocean.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 93, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'otters'' or 'otter's'?
Suggestion: otters'; otter's
...near the Alaskan coast have reduced the otters resistance to dangerous infections whic...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 236, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ain, the lecturer founds problem in the authors argument. She contends that the otters ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, second, so, then, therefore, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1399.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 275.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08727272727 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07223819929 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47440731303 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.527272727273 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 423.9 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.8637109456 49.2860985944 128% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.615384615 110.228320801 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1538461538 21.698381199 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.15384615385 7.06452816374 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 4.33554083885 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.132471612484 0.272083759551 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.047059997527 0.0996497079465 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0492558802008 0.0662205650399 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0868620591416 0.162205337803 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0371580958683 0.0443174109184 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.3589403974 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.