Both the listening and the writing discuss several possible ways that agnostids lived before they became extinct. They contradict each other from the following three perspectives.
First, the lecturer challenges the idea purposed by the writer that agnostids lived by being strong swimmers and predating other creatures actively. Instead, she contends that agnostids with tiny eyes cannot catch enough prey because a good vision is important for a predator. Moreover, she cites that there is no evidence that agnostids had other special sensory that can help them get better at finding food.
Second, the professor refutes the idea advocated by the author that agnostids were seafloor dwellers scavenging dead organisms for lives. Nevertheless, she posits that agnostids which can move fast across long distances and large areas are not as usual as being seafloor dwellers. This is because seafloor dwellers tend to stay and occupy a small area and usually cannot move fast.
Third, the lecture casts doubt on the thought illustrated in the passage that agnostides lived as parasites. On the contrary, it indicates that the population for parasites is often not large and usually limits to a certain degree or they will kill the host organisms. Agnostides, however, have a large population shown by the numbers of fossils found indicating that they may rule out their hosts if they really lived as parasites.
In conclusion, the talk rebuts the passage from three distinct aspects in regard to the way that agnostids may have lived.
- TOEFL T P O 43 Integrated Writing Task 3
- TPO40 integrated 65
- TPO 44 Integrated Writing Task 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement When teachers assign projects on which students must work together the students learn much more effectively than when they are asked to work alone on projects Use specific reasons and examples to supp 70
- TPO37 integrated writing Question Summarize the points made in the lecture being sure to explain how they respond to the specific points made in the reading passage 80
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, really, second, so, third, well, in conclusion, in regard to, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 19.0 30.3222958057 63% => 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: 1299.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 246.0 270.72406181 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28048780488 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96035189615 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55793147249 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.630081300813 0.540411800872 117% => OK
syllable_count: 389.7 419.366225166 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 26.2566129236 49.2860985944 53% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 108.25 110.228320801 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.9166666667 7.06452816374 155% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => 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: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0129428116122 0.272083759551 5% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.00561963124523 0.0996497079465 6% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0186382083006 0.0662205650399 28% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.010053817496 0.162205337803 6% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0201076349921 0.0443174109184 45% => 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: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.8 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.