Both the reading and the listening materials discuss size of animals in the past. To be more specific, the reading argues that animals in past were bigger than they are today. On the contrary, the lecturer refutes this notion and believes that it is far from the truth.
First and foremost, the reading starts by stating that ancient mammals were gigantic because the earth had a plenty of oxygen. This is challenged by the professor, who thinks that the reading’s argument is groundless. He fosters his idea by claiming that there were a lot of volcanoes then, so carbon dioxide took over most of the breathing air for animals; in brief, the environment did not support great body mammals.
Furthermore, the reading claims that a great amount of nutrients from plants allows animals in the past to have larger body. In contrast, the lecturer disagrees with this notion and claims that this idea is groundless. He further explains that although there were plenty of plants, the amount of nutrients in those trees was too little to support animal with big size.
Finally, the reading finishes by claiming that warm climate enables mammals to grow into bigger size. On the other hand, the lecturer believes that this is not true because they need to cool environment to release the energy. To be more specific/ precise, when they finish their meals, ancient animals’ body will increase heat; large mammals will contain more energy, so in order to keep them healthy, giant animals will live in cold areas.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, furthermore, if, so, then, as to, in brief, in contrast, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => 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: 1269.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 255.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97647058824 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99608801488 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44342364481 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564705882353 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 374.4 419.366225166 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.5026142987 49.2860985944 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.75 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.25 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.91666666667 7.06452816374 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.285760460604 0.272083759551 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10059512704 0.0996497079465 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0448120794008 0.0662205650399 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.170397532944 0.162205337803 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0353337313263 0.0443174109184 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.3589403974 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => 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.