TPO-43 - Integrated Writing Task
The lecture and the reading passage discuss agnostids, a group of marine animals that became extinct 450 million years ago and were primitive anthropods-relatives of modern-day insects. Although the passage claims some theories about how agnostids may have lived, the speaker refutes these ideas through a number of reasons which I will describe in this report.
First and foremost, the passage points out that agnostids may have been free-swimming predators that hunted smaller animals. The lecturer, in contrast, rejects this by claiming that other arthropods which are good hunters have large well-developed eyes because vision is an important ability for animals to be a predator. On the other hand, agnostids were blind or had a poor eyesight, so they must had other abilities for finding and hunting preys, but there is not any evidence of such as these abilities in fossil records, and it is less probable that they were free-swimming predators.
Furthermore, unlike the passage which states that agnostids may have been seafloor dwellers like some other primitive arthropods, the professor argues that seafloor dwellers typically do not have the ability to move fast, and they usually live in a specific geographic area all of their living periods. Conversely, fossil records show that agnostids lived in multiple geographic areas, and they were able to move fast. Therefore, it is unlikely for agnostids to be seafloor dwellers.
Finally, although the passage says that agnostids may have been parasites because a large number of modern-day anthropods are parasites, the speaker disagrees by mentioning that the population of parasitic could not be very large because if they become expanded, their host animal may become extinct. But the fossil records shows that agnostids had a large population which could reject the theory of being parasites.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 10, column 83, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...nostids may have been parasites because a large number of modern-day anthropods are parasites, th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, if, may, so, therefore, well, in contrast, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => 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: 1582.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 292.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.41780821918 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80555336215 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558219178082 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 488.7 419.366225166 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.51434878587 330% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 29.0 21.2450331126 137% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 78.6628247649 49.2860985944 160% => OK
Chars per sentence: 158.2 110.228320801 144% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.2 21.698381199 135% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.5 7.06452816374 163% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.482147919422 0.272083759551 177% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.194958335595 0.0996497079465 196% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0518956921676 0.0662205650399 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.287165672705 0.162205337803 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0565397161507 0.0443174109184 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.7 13.3589403974 140% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.58 53.8541721854 62% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 11.0289183223 143% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.75 12.2367328918 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.4 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 63.6247240618 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.498013245 130% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.