TPO45 integrated
The author of the reading passage doubts the theory that bees exist on Earth 200 million years ago and the fossil structures support it, while the lecturer in the lecture expresses an opposite view.
To begin with, the author claims that fossil evidence of actual bees dated to 200 million years ago have never been found. However, the lecturer refutes that it cannot exclude the possibility of bees' existence in that time because fossil remains are hard to preserve. Tree resin, a kind of sticky liquid, is necessary to the formation of fossils, while trees with this type of resin were very rare before; they come into being much later. Therefore, it is entirely possible that bees do exist in that period, but since there is almost no trees producing the resin, the bees cannot be preserved.
Moreover, the author believers that bees and flowers today have mutually dependent relationship, but flowering plans does not exist 200 million years ago. On the contrary, the lecturer rebuts that bees might exist on Earth before flowering plants appeared. Those early bees could feed on non-flowering plants such as pine trees, and they gradually evolved into flower-eating insects as they are today. Later, when flowering plants came into being, bees adapt to new feeding on them and hence developed a stable and close relationship with them.
Finally, the author puts forward that the chambers of fossils discovered in Arizona lacks some characters of bees' nests, such as spiral caps. Instead, the lecturer retorts that there is chemical evidence that supports the theory that bees built those chambers. To protect their home against water, modern bees use a special material which has distinct chemical composition when building their nests. When being analyzed chemically, the fossil structures proved to contain the same waterproof material that is used by today’s bees.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, hence, however, moreover, so, therefore, while, kind of, such as, on the contrary, to begin with
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 : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1584.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 305.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19344262295 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17902490978 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.43496433861 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 145.348785872 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.593442622951 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 476.1 419.366225166 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 23.1122806056 49.2860985944 47% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 121.846153846 110.228320801 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4615384615 21.698381199 108% => 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 : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0795941705523 0.272083759551 29% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.031649595256 0.0996497079465 32% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0221707278115 0.0662205650399 33% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0484867883246 0.162205337803 30% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0172957787545 0.0443174109184 39% => 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: 14.7 13.3589403974 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 53.8541721854 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.12 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.82 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 63.6247240618 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.