tpo39
Both the reading and listening parts offer two different views about the plausible causes of mass-extinction at the end of the Triassic. While the passage lists three possible causes for this event, the lecturer, on the other hand, refutes all of them and presents some clues to call them into the question.
First of all, the article refers to the distraction of food chain in the worldwide scope which caused by the decrement of sea level near the Triassic period as the feasible factor for the demolishment. On the other hand, the professor casts doubt on the accuracy of this hypothesis. As she explains, although, all scientist agree on the fluctuation of sea level at the end of the Triassic period, this decline had occurred in the gradual pattern, which all the coastal and sea species had this chance to adopt the changes; therefore, the decrement of the level did not cause this massive extinction. The mass-extinction could be happened for this reason, in the case that the sea level had been decreased haphazardly.
Secondly, the text claims the sulfur dioxide released by the volcanic activities adduced a lowering the global temperature; which devastated many animals. On the contrary, the instructor rejects this assumption too. As she asserts, the sulfur dioxide can reduce the temperature, but this reduction is for an ephemeral period since the sulfur dioxide does not stand in the atmosphere for a long period. During the Triassic period, the sulfur dioxide did not present in the atmosphere for enough duration to reduce the temperature in the global scope and lead to mass-extinction, since it was washed out by the water and fall into the ground as the rain.
Finally, meanwhile, the passage considers the asteroid strike as the possible reason for this mass-extinction; the lecturer refutes the possibility of this consideration too. According to the professor, even though, the asteroid strikes in the past cause some massive extinction, there is no asteroid accident with earth, close to the Triassic period. Based on her claim, the most recent strike had occurred 12 million years ago of this mass-extinction, which is so former than this event and could not lead to this extinction.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...clues to call them into the question. First of all, the article refers to the ...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... level had been decreased haphazardly. Secondly, the text claims the sulfur dio...
^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...and fall into the ground as the rain. Finally, meanwhile, the passage consider...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, first of all, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 12.0772626932 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 30.3222958057 158% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 5.01324503311 359% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1865.0 1373.03311258 136% => OK
No of words: 368.0 270.72406181 136% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06793478261 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37987740619 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8602747643 2.5805825403 111% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 145.348785872 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.510869565217 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 555.3 419.366225166 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.25165562914 399% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 64.210452798 49.2860985944 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.461538462 110.228320801 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.3076923077 21.698381199 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.69230769231 7.06452816374 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 16.6 13.3589403974 124% => 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: 12.42 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.89 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 63.6247240618 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => 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.