In this set of materials, the author of the reading passage explains three possible hypotheses of how agnostides which became extinct survived in 450 million years ago. However, the professor refutes all of three theories by explaining the methods of the agnositdes how did they live in the past.
First of all, the author claims that according to the different types of primitive arthropods, which are related to the angostides, were capable of swimming and predators. It is possible that the angostides behaved in the same way. On the contrary, the professor disagrees. She thinks that because the arthropods have a large eyes and good vision, make them be the predators. But the agnostides are poorly eyes and blind, therefore, it is impossible that agnostides are free-swimming predators.
In addition, the author raises the point that the agnositeds may live near the seafloor, using the arthropods as examples. However, the professor is against the idea by indicates that if the agnosites had dwelled on the seafloor, they would have moved slowly and stayed local area. But the fact is that the arthropods are multiple across the regions and move easily and fast.
Finally, the author states that the angostides may were parasites and use fleas, ticks, and mites as examples. However, the professor asserts that if the agnostids were parasites, the fossils we observed should have been fewer agnostides. In the end, the angostides are not possible parasites.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, may, so, therefore, well, in addition, first of all, on the contrary, in the same way
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1236.0 1373.03311258 90% => OK
No of words: 238.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19327731092 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92775363542 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73104072349 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 132.0 145.348785872 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.554621848739 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 382.5 419.366225166 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.2064200473 49.2860985944 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.0769230769 110.228320801 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3076923077 21.698381199 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.15384615385 7.06452816374 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.393431555568 0.272083759551 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113153752709 0.0996497079465 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0709301710711 0.0662205650399 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.211490831015 0.162205337803 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0534208709417 0.0443174109184 121% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.