R. robustus
The professor doesn't agree with the fact that R. robustus would be a scavenger as suggested by the given reading passage. She condemns all the possible explanations given by the passage and provides with the alterantive explanations and evidences to state that these species were in fact active predators.
For the first argument suggested by the passage regarding its small size and how it couldn't hunt down large sized Psittacosaurs, she provides alternative explanation on how R. robustus might have actually hunted down the baby psittacosaurs and similar sized other animals. As the predators are generally supposed to be at least twice the size than their prey, it oculd very well be possible for them to hunt down such babies who would be much smaller that R. robusutus.
Similarly, the counter argument against the shape and structure of legs that could have prevented R. robustus from being able to chase their prey, is given by the example of present living animal, Tasmanian Devil which has the similar short and sideways positioned legs and yet it can run upto 15 km speed and is a successful predator. If these animals with similar structure could be active hunters, there could be possibility for the R. robustus to be similarly active predator as well.
Finally, the lack of evidence of teeth marks in bones as suggested by the passage to show R. robusuts as scavengers who devoured on the eggs, is dealt by the explanation that the these species in fact had very strong jaws and could have swallowed up the food whole or in large pieces that could have in fact led to the absence of teeth marks in the first palce. This disregards the claim from the reading paasage on how they could not be actively preying.
In conclusion, the counter argument against all of the three explanations; small size, structure of legs and absence of teeth marks in bones, are well dealt with explanations on the animal's nature of hunting baby preys, their similarity with present day active animal and swallowing nature of amimal, respectively, help to put forth a solid argument that R. robustus were in fact active predators.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 15, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
The professor doesnt agree with the fact that R. robustus wo...
^^^^^^
Line 1, column 22, Rule ID: AGREE_WITH_THE_FACT[1]
Message: Use simply 'agree that'.
Suggestion: agree that
The professor doesnt agree with the fact that R. robustus would be a scavenger as sug...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 85, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...age regarding its small size and how it couldnt hunt down large sized Psittacosaurs, sh...
^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 45, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...onclusion, the counter argument against all of the three explanations; small size, structu...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 183, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'animals'' or 'animal's'?
Suggestion: animals'; animal's
...are well dealt with explanations on the animals nature of hunting baby preys, their sim...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, finally, first, if, regarding, similarly, so, well, at least, in conclusion, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 30.3222958057 171% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1786.0 1373.03311258 130% => OK
No of words: 360.0 270.72406181 133% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96111111111 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35587717469 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63540559579 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 145.348785872 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.488888888889 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 547.2 419.366225166 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 88.8698424039 49.2860985944 180% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.066666667 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.26666666667 7.06452816374 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.137475092832 0.272083759551 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0827405535844 0.0996497079465 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.124040907782 0.0662205650399 187% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0867346626778 0.162205337803 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0504734732651 0.0443174109184 114% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.3589403974 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.9 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.