TPO-43 - Integrated Writing Task Agnostids were a group of marine animals that became extinct about 450 million years ago. Agnostid fossils can be found in rocks in many areas around the world. From the fossil remains, we know that agnostids were primitiv

The reading and the writing both are about anthropodes named, Agnostids marine which were the relatives of modern insects. The author believes that it is difficult to inferred from fossils how they behave and what they eat to live life. So, he provides three theories how they were lived. The speaker challenges the statement made by the author. He is of opinion that none of the theory is convincing.

First of all, the article notes that Agnostid was free swimming predator and they were used to hunt on numerous small organisms to survive. However, the lecturer refutes the point by mentioning that swimming predators usually have well-developed vision in order to pray. But, the eyes of Agnostids were poorly developed as well as no evidence of any other developed sensory organ in order to hunt on ocean organisms.

Secondly, the author suggests that they could be seafloor dwellers and survived by dead organism and grazing bacteria. The professor, on the other hand, is not agreed with the idea and he asserts that seafloor dwellers are not able to move quickly and cannot spread to other areas. Therefore, they usually live in a smaller geographic area rather than multiple geographic areas. Further, he mentions that agnostid was very fast and spread into different locations by contrast to seafloor dwellers. In this way, this theory is ruled out with erroneous assumption.

In the last,it is stated that they could be existed as parasites and lived on primitive fishes and other animals.

Votes
Average: 5.3 (3 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 88, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[5]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'used to hunting'.
Suggestion: used to hunting
...as free swimming predator and they were used to hunt on numerous small organisms to survive....
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 12, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , it
...ith erroneous assumption. In the last,it is stated that they could be existed as...
^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, as well as, first of all, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => 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: 1261.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 249.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.06425702811 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97237131171 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53646810046 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59437751004 0.540411800872 110% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.7991320558 49.2860985944 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.0714285714 110.228320801 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7857142857 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.64285714286 7.06452816374 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
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: 0.389160186293 0.272083759551 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111236769519 0.0996497079465 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.065084100213 0.0662205650399 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.207142095076 0.162205337803 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0385315167524 0.0443174109184 87% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.77 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.17 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.