The lecturer expresses her disapproval of the theories regarding the decline in sea otter population presented in the reading. According to the reading, the sea otter population is said to have declined more likely due to environmental pollution than attacks by predators. However, the lecturer begs to differ.
Firstly, the lecturer provides the explaination that if pollution was the main cause of the decline in sea otters, dead bodies should have been found washing up on the shores. However, no such sightings indicate that pollution may not be the major reason behind declining sea otter population. Infection could be one reason provided by the lecturer as an example. This explaination is also consistent with the predator theory provided in the reading.
Secondly, the lecturer points out that whales who used to live in these areas have started moving outwards into the ocean fearing the human intervention, which may have led to whale hunting animals like ocras to hunt other nearby animals such as sea otters, seals and seal lions. According to the lecturer, this is a more plausible explanation to the declining sea otters and other animal's population in the area than the ones provided in the reading.
Thridly, the lecturer argues that the uneven patterns in the decline of the otter population could have been due to location specific terrain. Sea otters cannot access rocky areas and thus the population of sea otters in rocky areas have not declined more significantly than other areas. Without more knowledge regarding the terrain, this information cannot be attributed to the population theory.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 383, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'animals'' or 'animal's'?
Suggestion: animals'; animal's
...n to the declining sea otters and other animals population in the area than the ones pr...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, thus, as to, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 22.412803532 40% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 5.01324503311 339% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1364.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 260.0 270.72406181 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24615384615 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70441234908 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.515384615385 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 429.3 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.6448823191 49.2860985944 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.666666667 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6666666667 21.698381199 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.16666666667 7.06452816374 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 4.33554083885 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.357903145594 0.272083759551 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.139896140415 0.0996497079465 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0869739731911 0.0662205650399 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.231313246501 0.162205337803 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0141566737985 0.0443174109184 32% => 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: 14.1 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 53.8541721854 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.