Tpo30
In this set of material, the article and the lecture disagree on the merit of whether the lines surrounding pattern of a fossilized dinosaur called Sinosauropteryx were feathers. The reading passage states critics against this theory. He believes that those lines could be skin fibers with functional structure, or could be frills, and the unusual location of those lines in the backbone of that dinosaur suggests made the structure useless and unhelpful to that animal. In contrary, the professor challenges the reading passage's critics. He presents three reasons casts doubt on the article proving that all the three analysts are skeptical. Following is a brief interpretation to this perspectives.
Frist of all, the writer in the passage claims that the fine lines do not represent any role in the structure of the living dinosaurs. Furthermore, those fine lines probably formed after the death of the animal. Especially, those fossils of animals which buried by volcanic ash which in turn help in decomposition of the fibers. However, the professor in the listening passage refutes this idea. He states that the decay of other fossilized animals in the same site was unlikely rare. In fact, the other adjacent fossils were well preserved and beautifully structured which makes the possibility of those lines to represent feathers firm.
Secondly, the writer in the reading passage claims that those lines could be frills. He believes so because there were many several dinosaurs had frills at the time. Nevertheless, the lecturer rebuffs this reason, too. He believes that it is very easy to know the chemilcal structural difference between feathers and frins. Frills composed from Beta carotean, while feathers are not. Therefore, after the chemilcal analytic of those lines. They discovered that they did not contain any B carotean which means it was not frills.
Last but not the last, the writer argues that those lines were in a position in the backbone that unhelpful with any feathers' function. In another word, it was useless. Whereas, the professor oppoes this argument. He believes that those lines could represent feathers and it did not necessary help that animal in thermoregulation or flying. He gives example of peacock bird which has a wonderful colorful feathethers that helped that bird in attracting its mate. And after careful chemical analysis of those lines. Scientis are capable to identify those lines were white and orange color. Thus, they could be feathers.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
whether the lines surrounding pattern of a fossilized dinosaur called Sinosauropteryx were feathers.
Description: about 'the lines surrounding pattern of a fossilized dinosaur' , it is
the lines' surrounding patterns of a fossilized dinosaur?
or
the lines surrounding the pattern of a fossilized dinosaur?
those fine lines probably formed after the death of the animal
those fine lines are probably formed after the death of the animal
Sentence: Following is a brief interpretation to this perspectives.
Description: A determiner/pronoun, singular is not usually followed by a noun, plural, common
Suggestion: Refer to this and perspectives
those fossils of animals which buried by volcanic ash
those fossils of animals which are buried by volcanic ashes
those fossils of animals buried by volcanic ashes
because there were many several dinosaurs had frills at the time.
because there were many several dinosaurs who had frills at the time.
Frills composed from Beta carotean,
Frills are composed from Beta carotean,
those lines were in a position in the backbone that unhelpful with any feathers' function.
those lines were in a position in the backbone that is unhelpful with any feathers' function.
Scientis are capable to identify those lines were white and orange color
Scientis are capable to identify those lines which were in white and orange colors
Sentence: Therefore, after the chemilcal analytic of those lines.
Error: chemilcal Suggestion: chemical
Sentence: Whereas, the professor oppoes this argument.
Error: oppoes Suggestion: oppose
Sentence: He gives example of peacock bird which has a wonderful colorful feathethers that helped that bird in attracting its mate.
Error: feathethers Suggestion: featherers
flaws:
No. of Grammatical Errors: 8 2 //Read a good grammar book.
--------------------
No. of Words: 400 250 //Write the essay in 20 minutes.
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 20 in 30
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 8 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 27 12
No. of Words: 400 250
No. of Characters: 2043 1200
No. of Different Words: 194 150
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.472 4.2
Average Word Length: 5.108 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.628 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 149 80
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 121 60
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 84 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 14.815 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.944 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.407 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.276 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.418 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.085 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 4
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 683, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
... Following is a brief interpretation to this perspectives. Frist of all, the writer...
^^^^
Line 4, column 169, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ction. In another word, it was useless. Whereas, the professor oppoes this argument. He...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, well, whereas, while, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 12.0772626932 166% => OK
Pronoun: 47.0 22.412803532 210% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 48.0 30.3222958057 158% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2093.0 1373.03311258 152% => OK
No of words: 400.0 270.72406181 148% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2325 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.472135955 4.04702891845 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70188707203 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 145.348785872 139% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.505 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 652.5 419.366225166 156% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 3.25607064018 369% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 13.0662251656 207% => Too many sentences.
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.4951875911 49.2860985944 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 77.5185185185 110.228320801 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.8148148148 21.698381199 68% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.18518518519 7.06452816374 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0433192329821 0.272083759551 16% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0131515808399 0.0996497079465 13% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.017326578351 0.0662205650399 26% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0313521000804 0.162205337803 19% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0145406543121 0.0443174109184 33% => 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: 10.6 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 53.8541721854 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 11.0289183223 80% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.46 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.63 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 63.6247240618 171% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.