The reading and the lecture both discuss a controversial issue on private fossil collectors. The author of the reading believes that selling unique fossil to private collector would deprive the scientist and general public. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made by the author. He claims that the advantages of this issue outweigh the disadvantages. Let's take a closer look at both.
To begin with, the author of the reading pushes forth the idea that public interest in fossil would decrease due to that private collectors don't allow their fossils to be seen by people. In the lecture the professor has completely different opinion on this point. He thinks that collectors have attract people to fossils and peoples are more fascinated than exhibitions.
Furthermore, the article contends that the chance of investigation of the important fossils to understand extinctions species has be destroyed by private collectors. While, the professor says that commercial fossils are only available after that scientists have studied and investigated the fossils. Moreover, it is necessary for collectors to pass the investigation done by scientists.
Last but not least, the author notes out that lots of rarest fossil has been razed and destroyed by private collector because they are not trained. This point is challenged by the lecturer, he thinks that universities have not enough money to keep or undercover the buried fossils, therefore it is beneficial to community that private collectors crave and find new fossils or keep them in their gallery.
In summary, the lecturer demonstrate that the private collectors have positive effect on maintenance and discovery of the fossils for both the scientist and public.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 209, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...llector would deprive the scientist and general public. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 225, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...prive the scientist and general public. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made...
^^^
Line 1, column 356, Rule ID: LETS_LET[1]
Message: Did you mean 'Let's'?
Suggestion: Let's
... this issue outweigh the disadvantages. Lets take a closer look at both. To begin w...
^^^^
Line 2, column 141, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...decrease due to that private collectors dont allow their fossils to be seen by peopl...
^^^^
Line 2, column 295, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'attracted'.
Suggestion: attracted
...s point. He thinks that collectors have attract people to fossils and peoples are more ...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 131, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
...s to understand extinctions species has be destroyed by private collectors. While,...
^^
Line 4, column 52, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'of the rarest'.
Suggestion: of the rarest
...t least, the author notes out that lots of rarest fossil has been razed and destroyed by ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, if, look, moreover, so, therefore, while, in summary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1453.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 272.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.34191176471 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85666969443 2.5805825403 111% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529411764706 0.540411800872 98% => 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: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => 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: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.0522943072 49.2860985944 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.785714286 110.228320801 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4285714286 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.07142857143 7.06452816374 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => 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: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.452315449839 0.272083759551 166% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.153687536948 0.0996497079465 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.111332030771 0.0662205650399 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.273145646918 0.162205337803 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0448769695153 0.0443174109184 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => 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.