Starting in the 1960s and continuing until the 1980s, sailors in Russian submarines patrolling the North Atlantic and Arctic Ocean would occasionally hear strange sounds. These underwater noises reminded the submarine crews of frog croaks, so they called the sounds “quackers” (from the Russian word for frog sounds). The sources of the sound seemed to be moving with great speed and agility; however, the submarines’ sonar (a method of detecting objects underwater) was unable to detect any solid moving objects in the area. There are several theories about what might have caused the odd sounds.
The first theory suggests that the strange noises were actually the calls of male and female orca whales during a courtship ritual. Orca whales are known to inhabit the areas where the submarines were picking up the bizarre noises. Orcas have been studied extensively, and the sounds they make when trying to attract a mate are similar to those that the submarines were detecting.
A second idea is that the sounds were caused by giant squid. Giant squid are giant marine invertebrates that live deep in the ocean and prey on large fish. They are difficult to detect by sonar because they have soft bodies with no skeleton. Not much is known about giant squid behavior, but their complex brains suggest they are intelligent animals. It is possible they have the ability to emit sound, and perhaps they approached the submarines out of curiosity.
A third theory suggests the Russian submarines were picking up stray sounds from some military technology, like another country’s submarines that were secretly patrolling the area. Perhaps the foreign submarines did not register on the sonar because they were using a kind of technology specifically designed to make them undetectable by sonar. The strange froglike sounds may have been emitted by the foreign submarines unintentionally.
Both the lecturer and the writer focus on the possible reasons of the quackers sound, a frog like sound detected by Russian submarines. The writer claims that there are 3 theories can explain the cause of quackers. However, the lecturer strongly opposes all his idea by arguing that, though this sound is strange and scientists do not achieve agreement, the theories mentioned in the reading materials have problems. While the writer states that orca whales may produce quackers, the lecturer believes that such statement is highly unlikely, for, although the places where have submarines exist orca whales, they live deep in the ocean rendering their sound too deep to be heard by surface ocean. She further explains that the orca whales can be detected by submarines\' sonar, which also prove the impossibility of this theory. The reading next points out that giant squid is the main reason of such sound. The lecturer discredits this by arguing that the sound only existed for 2 decades, while squid lived continuously. She adds that quackers lasted from 1960 to 1980, nevertheless even today squid still live in Russian ocean, which means that if this sound was made by squid, this sound would not stop until today. Finally, the writer asserts that this strange noise could be made by foreign military technologies. However, the lecturer counters by stating that such sound cannot be formed by submarines because it constantly moved around and changed it\'s direction. She advances this argument saying that if the source of the sound is submarines it would make engine noise. Furthermore, there is not such technology that could move so fast and silent as the sound producer. In summary, the lecturer and the writer contradict each other on the causes of quackers.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, furthermore, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, still, while, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1476.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 292.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05479452055 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46421184687 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.575342465753 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 434.7 419.366225166 104% => 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: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => 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: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.5807795579 49.2860985944 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.538461538 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4615384615 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.76923076923 7.06452816374 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 1.0 4.09492273731 24% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.0990578581437 0.272083759551 36% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0365013672119 0.0996497079465 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.029372604467 0.0662205650399 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0990578581437 0.162205337803 61% => OK
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: 13.6 13.3589403974 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.31 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.57 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted. The correct pattern:
para 1: introduction
para 2: doubt 1
para 3: doubt 2
para 4: doubt 3
Less contents wanted from the reading passages(25%), more content wanted from the lecture (75%).
Don't need a conclusion paragraph.
Read sample essays from ETS:
http://www.testbig.com/users/toeflwritingmaster
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.