The reading and the lecture are both about fossils, which are being commercialized by private collectors. The writer says that these commercial activities have bad consequences on public and scientists. On the other hand, the lecturer states that the arguments brought by the writer are inaccurate when compared to reality.
First, there is an exaggeration regarding the negative outputs. The writer states that fossils are not exposed to public since nobody makes donations anymore. Conversely, the lecturer says everybody can buy the remains and expose them in the libraries, schools or other institutions. Thus the fossils are more likely to be viewed by a large public. This is a relevant counter-point to the author's point of view.
Second, before being sold, fossils are evaluated by experts. Therefore, scientists can do tests, evaluations and drag conclusions about past animals. In other words, they are able to identify details about their lives, habits and other specific features. So, the experts have the opportunity to examine and analyze the remains in detail, without missing significant points. This is a strong standpoint that directly contradicts the passage.
Third, there are no many scientific teams that work on the field in order to dig up fossils. Even though, people who do diggings are not specialized and although they might cause some damages, the number of pieces they found is impressive. Not to mention that, if it wasn't for them, a large number of fossils would still be hidden in the ground, and consequently people would have less information about animal life in the past. In conclusion the author and the lecturer appear to be in disagreement regarding this topic.
- TPO-47 - Integrated Writing Task Pterosaurs were an ancient group of winged reptiles that lived alongside the dinosaurs. Many pterosaurs were very large, some as large as a giraffe and with a wingspan of over 12 meters. Paleontologists have long wondered 84
- TPO-44 - Independent Writing Task Some people believe that when busy parents do not have a lot of time to spend with their children, the best use of that time is to have fun playing games or sports. Others believe that it is best to use that time doing th 73
- What are some of the qualities of good parent? Use specific details and examples to explain your answer. 90
- If you could invent something new, what product would you develop? Use specific details to explain why this invention is needed 90
- TPO-17 - Integrated Writing Task In the past century, the steady growth of the human population and the corresponding increase in agriculture and pesticide use have caused much harm to wildlife in the United States,birds in particular. Unfortunately for b 81
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 285, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
...braries, schools or other institutions. Thus the fossils are more likely to be viewe...
Line 7, column 18, Rule ID: NOW
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
...adicts the passage. Third, there are no many scientific teams that work on the ...
Line 7, column 268, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
... impressive. Not to mention that, if it wasnt for them, a large number of fossils wou...
Line 7, column 284, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
... to mention that, if it wasnt for them, a large number of fossils would still be hidden in the gr...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, conversely, first, if, regarding, second, so, still, therefore, third, thus, in conclusion, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1439.0 1373.03311258 105% => OK
No of words: 274.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25182481752 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78418359655 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 145.348785872 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.609489051095 0.540411800872 113% => OK
syllable_count: 441.9 419.366225166 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.873144033 49.2860985944 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.6470588235 110.228320801 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.1176470588 21.698381199 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.17647058824 7.06452816374 116% => 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 : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.326878992374 0.272083759551 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0909538596971 0.0996497079465 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0892736923561 0.0662205650399 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.175561176325 0.162205337803 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0451718853415 0.0443174109184 102% => OK
automated_readability_index: 11.4 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.87 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 63.6247240618 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.