tpo 45
The lecture and the article are both about Did bees fossils, which are kind of insects. The professor states that these insects fossils relate to modern bees. These remnants create by bees. However, the passage disagrees with this idea for the following reasons.
First of all, the issue of a finding of real bees. The lecturer mentions that, although there are no fossils of natural bees, this does not mean that bees are not present. In addition, he says that these creatures' remnants are preserving by attaching sticky material, which is producing by the tree. In other words, he says that it might be this material that is not found before 200 million years to save these insect fossils. On the other hand, the reading asserts that these bees are not present before 200 million years.
Secondly, the issue of finding flower plants. The teacher says that if flowers do not exist in this duration, that not mean the bees are missing. Moreover, these creatures could feed on other plants, un flower plants, After appearing the flower these insects are adapting to feed on the flower.
Finally, the trouble of presence caps on the chamber of bees. The professor claims that these caps are not finding in the old chamber but these chambers have waterproof material, which is a presence on the modern chambers. As a result, these materials are using by both types of bees
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...not present before 200 million years. Secondly, the issue of finding flower pl...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, in addition, kind of, as a result, first of all, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1170.0 1373.03311258 85% => OK
No of words: 236.0 270.72406181 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.95762711864 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91947592106 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.24252644977 2.5805825403 87% => OK
Unique words: 122.0 145.348785872 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.516949152542 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 334.8 419.366225166 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.0506095732 49.2860985944 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 78.0 110.228320801 71% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.7333333333 21.698381199 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.86666666667 7.06452816374 140% => OK
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 : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.0437000090997 0.272083759551 16% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0181308477527 0.0996497079465 18% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0245722211517 0.0662205650399 37% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0287371123394 0.162205337803 18% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.017791291435 0.0443174109184 40% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.8 13.3589403974 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 73.17 53.8541721854 136% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.8 11.0289183223 62% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.19 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.66 8.42419426049 91% => OK
difficult_words: 49.0 63.6247240618 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 5.0 10.7273730684 47% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.