TPO-43 - Integrated Writing Task
In this set materials, the reading passage state that agnositds had several strategic for living such as free_swimming preditors, seafloor dwellers and parasites. On the other hand, the listening section brings into question the reading by providing different reasons (and examples).
First of all, the reading passage indicates that the agnositeds live as predators, and they cashed smaller animals as food; in contrast, the lecturer opposes this view by mentioning that in the open ocean, the free-swimming predators have large well develop eyes to see the pray, but the agnositde did not have large eyes, also they had tiny small eyes and in some case they were blind. As result, they must have another sensor or part to recognize the pray, but in the fossils that remain from agnostids did not have the sign that shows the particular parts.
secondly, the reading argues that agnostids lived on seafloors; hence, they had a lot of food. Conversely, what the lecturer believes is different. She points that the animals that live in the seafloor do not have the ability to move fast or go far distance; also, they live in a small place in the seafloor. Nevertheless, angositds had fast with high-speed, and they lived in multiple and large places. Furthermore, they had the ability to move pretty fast and went to the large distance place.
Finally, according to the reading, agnostides lived as parasites. However, the lecturer believes that the parasites do not have a large population, because if there were too many parasites, they would kill off the host organisms they live on. Hence, the parasite did not want to kill the host while we know there were a large population of agnostids, so they could not live as parasites.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Secondly
...that shows the particular parts. secondly, the reading argues that agnostids live...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, well, while, in contrast, such as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 10.4613686534 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1460.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 290.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03448275862 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62174207544 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.537931034483 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 445.5 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 83.7285627622 49.2860985944 170% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.666666667 110.228320801 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1666666667 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 14.5 7.06452816374 205% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.336858282812 0.272083759551 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.12530392558 0.0996497079465 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0701251824327 0.0662205650399 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.204643170379 0.162205337803 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0679894799476 0.0443174109184 153% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.3589403974 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 10.7273730684 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.