TPO10
The reading passage deals with the issue of reasons why the sea otter population is in rapid decline, and states that it is more likely because of environmental pollution. The professor's talk focuses on the same issue. However, he believes that it is because of attacks by predators, which is exactly the opposite of what the reading states. And in the lecture, he makes three specific points to back up his point of view.
In the first place, even though the reading passage suggests that there were known sources of it along the coast and water samples showed the levels of chemicals increased, the professor claims in the lecture that the absence of dead sea otters washed up the coast suggests that their decline is not caused by sea pollution but rather by sea predators who consume their bodies after killing them. Apparently, the professor's argument disproves its counterpart in the reading.
In the second place, contrary to the statement in the reading that other sea mammals are also declining, the professor argues that orcas are likely factors in the disappearance of sea otters. Then he supports this point with the fact that the scarcity of whales, their usual prey, has left them with no other choice but to start hunting smaller mammals.
Further, the professor states that the uneven pattern of sea otter decline corresponds to the distribution of the orcas while the author of the reading claims that changeable environmental factors, which lead to different concentrations of pollutants, better explains the varying pattern of sea otter decline. The professor shows that this Claim is very weak by pointing out that their population has declined most rapidly where orcas are most prevalent further validates the predation theory.
To sum up, the professor precisely discovers the flaws in the reading passage and successfully reveals that the main argument in the reading is incorrect.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 414, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
...ies after killing them. Apparently, the professors argument disproves its counterpart in t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, first, however, if, second, so, then, while, to sum up, in the first place, in the second place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 30.3222958057 152% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1604.0 1373.03311258 117% => OK
No of words: 313.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12460063898 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20616286096 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62289617757 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536741214058 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 480.6 419.366225166 115% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 98.0434209761 49.2860985944 199% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.818181818 110.228320801 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.4545454545 21.698381199 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.7272727273 7.06452816374 152% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.304224784985 0.272083759551 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0994355496593 0.0996497079465 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0973822649803 0.0662205650399 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1541600641 0.162205337803 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0832183351594 0.0443174109184 188% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 13.3589403974 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 53.8541721854 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.0289183223 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.21 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 63.6247240618 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => 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.