TPO47
In the reading section, the writer contends that pterosaurs which were an ancient group of winged reptiles could have not powered flight because of several reasons; however, in the lecture, the professor completely refutes all the reading points by presenting some reasons and examples.
First of all, the writer claims that pterosaurs were unable to produce a lot of energy needed to fly since they were probably cold-blooded animals similar to modern reptiles; on the other hand, the professor takes issue with this statement and states that fossil's records of them has been shown that they had dance-hair covering which is typical of warm-blooded animals; therefore, they would have produced enough energy needed to fly.
Moreover, the writer also indicates that pterosaurs were so large and probably so heavy that it could have not allowed them to fly; in contrast, the lecture material is against this notion and states that even though they were so large, they were not so heavy. The speaker declares that they were even unusually light because of the hollow in their bones. Hence, he states that they were light enough to fly.
In addition, the writer also manifests that pterosaurs' back leg muscles were too small and weak to allow them to launch themselves into the air; on the contrary, the lecture again rejects this belief by expressing that unlike most animals, they could have used all of their limbs instead of just their back legs for launching themselves.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, in addition, in contrast, 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 : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1240.0 1373.03311258 90% => OK
No of words: 244.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.08196721311 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95227774224 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.36075534854 2.5805825403 91% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.569672131148 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 372.6 419.366225166 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 6.0 13.0662251656 46% => 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: 40.0 21.2450331126 188% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 133.237882501 49.2860985944 270% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 206.666666667 110.228320801 187% => OK
Words per sentence: 40.6666666667 21.698381199 187% => OK
Discourse Markers: 22.0 7.06452816374 311% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.456892993858 0.272083759551 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.209093294286 0.0996497079465 210% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0718511551539 0.0662205650399 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.261069262395 0.162205337803 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0250012487874 0.0443174109184 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 22.8 13.3589403974 171% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.34 53.8541721854 73% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.7 11.0289183223 160% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.07 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.63 8.42419426049 114% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 26.0 10.7273730684 242% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 18.0 10.498013245 171% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 11.2008830022 161% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.