The reading asserts that agnostids became extinct 450 million years ago. They live in the sea. There are no certain evidences from their fossils to found out that how exactly they behaved. But there are three theories about how they may behave. The lecturer, however, finds the ideas dubious and casts doubt on the reasons proposed by the reading passage.
The author argues that they were swimmer predators. Although they were small, they could hunt other small organisms, because other types of primitive arthopods were also able to prey on. Conversely, the lecture brings up the ideas that other small arthopods had big eyes which was an advantage to prey on, but agnostids had very small eyes or they were almost blind. For chasing their preys they may had a good sense of smelling, but there is no evidence on fossils to prove that.
Furthermore, the reading passage holds a view that they are another types of primitive arthopods which were living on the seafloor, hence they reasonably lived on seafloors too, and they were feeding from bacteria. On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that seafloor organisms were not able to move fast, and also they were not able to spread out. But we know that agnostids’ habitat was a huge geographic area. Therefor they could not live on seafloors.
Finally, the reading states that agnostids may were a kind of organisms which lived on the body of other big organisms, because there are other arthopods which do the same. In contrast, the speaker rejects this idea due to the fact that these kinds of organisms have had very low population while there are some evidences from fossils which prove that the population of agnostids is very vast.
Essay evaluation report
to found out that
to find out that
they are another types of primitive arthopods
they are another type of primitive arthopods
they are other types of primitive arthopods
agnostids may were a kind of organisms
agnostids maybe was a kind of organisms
the speaker rejects this idea due to the fact that
the speaker rejects this idea because of the fact that
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 22 in 30
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 12
No. of Words: 290 250
No. of Characters: 1378 1200
No. of Different Words: 146 150
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.127 4.2
Average Word Length: 4.752 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.232 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 80 80
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 71 60
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 42 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 30 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.333 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.397 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.328 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.534 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.087 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 4
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, finally, furthermore, hence, however, may, so, while, in contrast, kind of, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => 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: 1430.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 290.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93103448276 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.37917041068 2.5805825403 92% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.51724137931 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 435.6 419.366225166 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 6.0 1.51434878587 396% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.9795594168 49.2860985944 124% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.3333333333 110.228320801 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3333333333 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.6 7.06452816374 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.393676685957 0.272083759551 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135386697615 0.0996497079465 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0557329685974 0.0662205650399 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.245381959637 0.162205337803 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0294492766356 0.0443174109184 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.3589403974 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.57 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.7273730684 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.