In this set of material the reading and the listening passages are discussing the Altruism, given explanation of this term and examples to support the main idea. Nevertheless, the reading and the listening passage are completely contradictory. In fact, whereas the reading passages puts forward the view that altruism has not a beneficial or is not a selfish act. The listening argues the opposite and it gives the reasons for holding its opinion.
First of all, the reading develops the claim that altruism is a good act, a feature of a noble human being, which involves personal sacrifices. Nevertheless, we can find altruism examples not only reflected in the human acts, even the animals reveal this behavior. For example, in the meerkats society there are individual who are in charge of looking out for predators, they take that challenge and make a sacrifices due to their lives are on risk.
However, the listening casts doubt on the information in the reading passages, due to the fact that the altruism is not at all an unselfish act with a sacrifice. For holding this point of view the listening introduce us to the same meerkats society. The meerkast who is responsible about looking out for predators as hawks, has the opportunity of be the first to scape after give the alarm for the other members. In contrast, the hunter meerkat which are looking for food, are more vulnerable to be attack by the hawks, in this point of view the true animal with an altruism behavior is the hunter. The second example given in the listening is about the human who donate a kidney. They receive some in exchange, the society approval, a invaluable reward, and in this case is not altruism behavior at all.
That is how both, the listening and the reading passages support and give the examples about what is an authentic altruism behavior.
In this set of material the reading and the listening passages are discussing the Altruism, given explanation of this term and examples to support the main idea. Nevertheless, the reading and the listening passage are completely contradictory. In fact, whereas the reading passages puts forward the view that altruism has not a beneficial or is not a selfish act. The listening argues the opposite and it gives the reasons for holding its opinion.
First of all, the reading develops the claim that altruism is a good act, a feature of a noble human being, which involves personal sacrifices. Nevertheless, we can find altruism examples not only reflected in the human acts, even the animals reveal this behavior. For example, in the meerkats society there are individual who are in charge of looking out for predators, they take that challenge and make a sacrifices due to their lives are on risk.
However, the listening casts doubt on the information in the reading passages, due to the fact that the altruism is not at all an unselfish act with a sacrifice. For holding this point of view the listening introduce us to the same meerkats society. The meerkast who is responsible about looking out for predators as hawks, has the opportunity of be the first to scape after give the alarm for the other members. In contrast, the hunter meerkat which are looking for food, are more vulnerable to be attack by the hawks, in this point of view the true animal with an altruism behavior is the hunter. The second example given in the listening is about the human who donate a kidney. They receive some in exchange, the society approval, a invaluable reward, and in this case is not altruism behavior at all.
That is how both, the listening and the reading passages support and give the examples about what is an authentic altruism behavior.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 286, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'meerkats'' or 'meerkat's'?
Suggestion: meerkats'; meerkat's
...veal this behavior. For example, in the meerkats society there are individual who are in...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 313, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'individuals'?
Suggestion: individuals
...mple, in the meerkats society there are individual who are in charge of looking out for pr...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 233, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'meerkats'' or 'meerkat's'?
Suggestion: meerkats'; meerkat's
... the listening introduce us to the same meerkats society. The meerkast who is responsibl...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 735, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...some in exchange, the society approval, a invaluable reward, and in this case is ...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, look, nevertheless, second, so, then, whereas, for example, in contrast, in fact, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 10.4613686534 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
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: 1535.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 315.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87301587302 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67186568022 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.485714285714 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 477.0 419.366225166 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => 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: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.0453229438 49.2860985944 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.642857143 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.14285714286 7.06452816374 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
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: 0.458095324982 0.272083759551 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.187439157729 0.0996497079465 188% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.216558344852 0.0662205650399 327% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.327097783475 0.162205337803 202% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.24931684999 0.0443174109184 563% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.