The reading passage suggests that the business of selling fossils is harmful to both the scientist and the general public. However, the lecturer cast doubt on each idea of the author.
First and foremost, the article states that the commercial shops of fossils limit the chance of the public to view the fossils because of the wealthy individual buyers which decline the public interest. On the other hand, the lecturer rejected this point by saying that the commercial markets have a lot of fossils for purchase which makes the price of fossils affordable for everyone such as public schools.
Secondly, the reading indicates the buyers may destroy the crucial discoveries about the extinct animals just keeping it away from the scientist. In contrast, the professor argued that the fossils must be pass through the hand of a scientist before it sold on a commercial market. According to her, the markets and buyers could not determine the fossils without the help of scientists.
Finally, the passage claims that the most commercial fossil collectors damage the valuable evidence for the scientist to get an experience more about the fossils such as the location. Nonetheless, the lecturer made a counterclaim to the idea by saying there are not enough fossils to get a right data and information about the extinct animals, so, the only fossil could not damage the work of the scientist.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 108, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...s harmful to both the scientist and the general public. However, the lecturer cast doubt on ea...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, may, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, in contrast, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 10.4613686534 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 22.412803532 40% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1171.0 1373.03311258 85% => OK
No of words: 230.0 270.72406181 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09130434783 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89432290496 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56971234773 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 123.0 145.348785872 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.534782608696 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 344.7 419.366225166 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => 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: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.9257508414 49.2860985944 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.111111111 110.228320801 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5555555556 21.698381199 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.5555555556 7.06452816374 164% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => 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: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.499490216532 0.272083759551 184% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.205451030923 0.0996497079465 206% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.111222468915 0.0662205650399 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.292494879553 0.162205337803 180% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0939185681707 0.0443174109184 212% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.31 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 50.0 63.6247240618 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.