TPO43 Integrated Writing
In the reading passage, the author lists out three theories about how agnostics may have lived. However, the speaker in the lecture disagrees with these theories and thinks all of them have serious weaknesses.
First, even though the author indicates that the agnostics may be free-swimming predators since their primitive arthropods were active predators, the speaker gives convincing evidence to refute this idea. Different from the arthropods which had well-developed eyes to track and catch their preys, according to the fossils, the agnostids have tiny and poorly-developed eyes and are almost blind. Therefore, the speaker thinks the evidence ruins out the theory entirely.
Secondly, the author indicates the theory that agnostids may be seafloor dwellers because other types of primitive arthropods lived in this way. Nevertheless, the speaker asserts that the seafloor dwellers usually move slowly and occupy in certain regional areas, however, the fossils of agnostids have been discovered in multiple regions which are far from a considerable distance. As a result, the speaker believes that the agnostids were unlikely seafloor dwellers.
Lastly, according to the reading, the agnostids are possible as parasites since many species of modern-day arthropods are parasites. On the contrary, the speaker disagrees with this idea. The populations of parasites would typically stay in certain limited since other parasites would compete to organisms on which they live. However, the fossils of different species agnostids have been found in vast amount. Therefore, the speaker considers that the evidence disproves the theory.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, lastly, may, nevertheless, second, secondly, therefore, well, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1394.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 245.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.68979591837 5.08290768461 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95632099841 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78127851969 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 127.0 145.348785872 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.518367346939 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 427.5 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.23620309051 170% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 54.344507025 49.2860985944 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.230769231 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8461538462 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.46153846154 7.06452816374 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => 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: 0.427355970829 0.272083759551 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.143390278064 0.0996497079465 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100319653956 0.0662205650399 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.248571648145 0.162205337803 153% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.086078069217 0.0443174109184 194% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.3589403974 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 53.8541721854 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.72 12.2367328918 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.91 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.