The reading passage states how selling and buying fossils to private collectors can be a disadvantageous practice for scientists and general public. However, the listening explains how exaggerated this idea is and discusses the many benefits that selling fossils in the commercial market can have.
First, the reading states that these fossils could be exhibited in museums and allowed to public view, which would not decline public’s interest in fossils. On the other hand, the listening clarifies that as result of fossils’ commercial trade, the public can actually have a greater exposure to them, once they would be available for public institutions’ purchase and, consequently, public display.
Second, the reading says that scientists tends to lose access to important fossils samples, since research institutions can not compete against these buyers, resulting in the loss of important discoveries. However, the listening states that for these fossils to be sold, there is a previous analysis, since their value is assessed on the basis of detailed examinations by specialized scientists.
As last, the reading mentions how many important evidences about these fossils are destroyed during the discovery process, losing valuable information about dinosaurs’ lives. Nevertheless, the listening exposes the fact that there are not enough research expeditions organized by scientists and universities in order to collect these information and, irrespective of the damage and lack of data, is better to have more fossils being found than keep them completely undiscovered.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 134, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...dvantageous practice for scientists and general public. However, the listening explains how ex...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 334, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this information' or 'these informations'?
Suggestion: this information; these informations
...ts and universities in order to collect these information and, irrespective of the damage and lac...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, consequently, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => 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: 1368.0 1373.03311258 100% => OK
No of words: 237.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.77215189873 5.08290768461 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92362132708 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11090382159 2.5805825403 121% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 145.348785872 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.582278481013 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 415.8 419.366225166 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.55342163355 116% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 13.0662251656 61% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 29.0 21.2450331126 137% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 50.9912676348 49.2860985944 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 171.0 110.228320801 155% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.625 21.698381199 137% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.875 7.06452816374 154% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.452021566411 0.272083759551 166% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.216759559209 0.0996497079465 218% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0653419617155 0.0662205650399 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.284636461221 0.162205337803 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0582744452656 0.0443174109184 131% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.6 13.3589403974 154% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 25.12 53.8541721854 47% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 5.55761589404 234% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.0 11.0289183223 154% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.78 12.2367328918 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.74 8.42419426049 116% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.498013245 130% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.2008830022 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.