TPO 43 - Integrated Writing Task
In the lecture, it is proposed that different theories has been made to explain how agnostids have lived. In contrast, in the lecture, the lecturer is skeptical about these three theories.
First of all, it is presented in the passage that agnosyids may have been free-swimming predators that hunted relatively small animals. Whereas, the professor puts forth that one significant requirement of predators is well-developed eyes. While, indeed, it has been confirmed that agnostids have poorly developed eyes, and sometimes were even blind. As a result, it is deficient of evidence that they could be predators.
Secondly, it is thought to be truth in the passage that agnostids are seafloor dwellers so that they survived by scavenging dead organizations. Notwithstanding, the professor holds a contradictory point of view that seafloor dwellers are not able to move fast and stayed localized while it is convincing that agnostids had ability to move rapidly and far. This is quite unusual for seafloor dwellers so they might not be a member of them.
Thirdly, agnostids are being thought to be parasites so that they could live on feeding off larger organisms because there are many modern arthropods that exist as parasites. Nevertheless, the professor disproves, saying, as parasites, the populations aren't able to be very large so as not to kill their hosts while the populations of agnostids were much more than other parasites. As a result, it rules out the possibility that they were parasites.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 138, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...s that hunted relatively small animals. Whereas, the professor puts forth that one sign...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 253, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
..., saying, as parasites, the populations arent able to be very large so as not to kill...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, may, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, well, whereas, while, in contrast, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 10.4613686534 229% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => 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: 1272.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 242.0 270.72406181 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25619834711 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94415379849 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99895252984 2.5805825403 116% => OK
Unique words: 137.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.566115702479 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 393.3 419.366225166 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.2752524592 49.2860985944 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.0 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1666666667 21.698381199 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.6666666667 7.06452816374 151% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.442677518591 0.272083759551 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.144852848124 0.0996497079465 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0816945681412 0.0662205650399 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.230358705757 0.162205337803 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0565929743555 0.0443174109184 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.