The reading and the lecture are both about fine lines found on fossil skeleton of a dinosaur called Sinosauropteryx which is assumed to be whether feature on not. The author provides some reasons to prove that fine lines are not their feathers. However, the professor in the lecture claims that the evidence which show the fine lines are feather is strong.
Frist of all, the author in text mentions that those fine lines are not belong to the real structure of a Sinosauropteryx. They might be fibers which had been decomposed of its skin. The professor on the contrary, argues that fibers which are decomposed of their skin is not acceptable because other animals that had been stored in volcanic ash are completely preserved without displaying any decomposition, as a result they are unlikely to be fiber.
Secondly, it is mentioned in the text that some dinosaurs had frills, hence, even if they belongs the real structure they may be some frills not feathers. The professor challenges the idea by asserting that chemical compositions of fine lines show their reality. Feathers have protein and carotid, whereas frills do not have none of them in their composition. Consequently they are not frill of the dinosaurs.
Finally, the author posits that feather is used for flying or regulating the inside temperature but the feather is existed in backbone. Therefore, they are not feathers because in that position they make the structure useless. The professor on the other hand, refuses the idea and contends that their feathers were not used for flight or thermoregulation but for display function. She added that those were to attract the mate, and their colorful structure made of orange and white, shows that they were feather.
- 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 suppo 83
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?It is better for children to choose jobs that are similar to their parents’ jobs than to choose jobs that are very different from their parents’ job.Use specific reasons and examples to support you 60
- TPO 28 - Integrated Writing Task 66
- TPO 31 Integrated Writing Task 45
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Teachers should not make their social or political views known to students in the classroom. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 73, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'belonged'.
Suggestion: belonged
... mentions that those fine lines are not belong to the real structure of a Sinosauropte...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 91, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'they' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'belong'
Suggestion: belong
...nosaurs had frills, hence, even if they belongs the real structure they may be some fri...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 361, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Consequently,
...have none of them in their composition. Consequently they are not frill of the dinosaurs. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 505, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'feathered'.
Suggestion: feathered
... orange and white, shows that they were feather.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, hence, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, whereas, as a result, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 10.4613686534 229% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1449.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 288.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03125 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71886972916 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 454.5 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.015941434 49.2860985944 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.5 110.228320801 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5714285714 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.1428571429 7.06452816374 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.36996807505 0.272083759551 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124786617193 0.0996497079465 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0615441346041 0.0662205650399 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.221552346452 0.162205337803 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0524273803213 0.0443174109184 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
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: 11.89 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.