Summarise the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they case doubt on specific points made in the reading passage.
The sea otter is a small mammal that lives in waters along the western coast of North America from California to Alaska.
When some sea otter populations off the Alaskan coast started rapidly declining a few years ago, it caused much concern because sea otters play an important ecological role in the coastal ecosystem. Experts started investigating the cause of the decline and quickly realized that there were two possible explanations: environmental pollution or attacks by predators.
Initially, the pollution hypothesis seemed the more likely of the two.
The first reason why pollution seemed the more likely cause was that there were known sources of it along the Alaskan coast, such as oil rigs and other sources of industrial chemical pollution. Water samples from the area revealed increased levels of chemicals that could decrease the otters' resistance to life-threatening infections and thus could indirectly cause their deaths.
Second, other sea mammals such as seals and sea lions along the Alaskan coast were also declining, indicating that whatever had endangered the otters was affecting other sea mammals as well. This fact again pointed to environmental pollution, since it usually affects the entire ecosystem rather than a single species. Only widely occurring predators, such as the orca (a large predatory whale), could have the same effect, but orcas prefer to hunt much larger prey, such as other whales.
Third, scientists believed that the pollution hypothesis could also explain the uneven pattern of otter decline: at some Alaskan locations the otter populations declined greatly, while at others they remained stable. Some experts explained these observations by suggesting that ocean currents or other environmental factors may have created uneven concentrations of pollutants along the coast.
Recently, there has been a ton of debate as to the rapidly declining population of the sea otter. More specifically, in regards to the passages, the writer puts forth the idea fo the decline in the otter population. In the listening passage, the lecturer is quick to point out there are some serious flaws in the writer's claims. In fact, the lecturer believes that the reasons behind this phenomenon are different from the point of view of the writer, and addresses, in detail, the trouble with each point made in the reading text.
First and foremost, the author of the reading text states that one of the reasons for declining in the sea otter population is pollution such as oil rigs and other sources of industrial chemical pollution. Some experiments form the water of that area reveals the increased levels of toxic material that can cause the death of od otters. Some professionals in the same field, however, stand in firm opposition to this claim. In the listening passage, the lecturer mentions that predation is the most cause of death. She goes on with the theory that predation theory washing off the infection caused by pollution.
Second, the author of reading states that whatever had endangered the otters was affecting other sea mammals as well. So this theory makes the pollution theory stronger. On the other hand, the lecturer believes that human hunters change that ecosystem which made the orcas change their diet.
Finally, the author of the reading text wraps his/her argument by positing that the pollution theory can also explain the uneven pattern of otter decline. Not surprisingly, the lecturer takes issue with this claim by contending the location and accessibility. She goes on that orcas can't access shallows so on that area the population has not decreased. She justifies the uneven pattern of otter decline with this.
To sum up, it is obvious that both the writer and lecturer hold conflicting views about the reasons behind the declining population of the sea otter of the Alaskan coast.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 118, Rule ID: IN_REGARD_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'regarding' or 'with regard to'.
Suggestion: regarding; with regard to
...on of the sea otter. More specifically, in regards to the passages, the writer puts forth the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 283, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...d accessibility. She goes on that orcas cant access shallows so on that area the pop...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, second, so, well, as to, in fact, such as, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 30.3222958057 168% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 5.01324503311 319% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1690.0 1373.03311258 123% => OK
No of words: 340.0 270.72406181 126% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97058823529 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29407602571 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54780589506 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.497058823529 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 513.9 419.366225166 123% => 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: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.1642036472 49.2860985944 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.4117647059 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 21.698381199 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.23529411765 7.06452816374 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.16933846396 0.272083759551 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0504216814577 0.0996497079465 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0477188349407 0.0662205650399 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0967575913259 0.162205337803 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0470138258554 0.0443174109184 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.3589403974 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.25 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 63.6247240618 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.