Tpo 45
The reading casts doubt about a theory which mentions to bees existence 200 million years ago base on the founded fossil on the Arizona in the southwest of United States and supports the argument by mentions to three points. However, the professor rejects the mentioned points in the reading part.
As a first point, lack of other fossil evidence organizes as first reason in the reading part which critics the bees existence. While, the professor claims that not enough fossil cannot be logical to reject the theory because they couldn’t preserved due to some reasons that tree is a significant factor. It means that tree’s stamina was in low amount and was delicate to save the nests. So this points seems inaccurate and not confirming with scientific evidence.
Secondly, the professor repudiates the second points which refer to lack of flowers in the mentioned time. In her opinion, lack of flowers cannot mean as any bees even opinions like non flower bees support the fact of bees existence and other food source was available for them. Therefore, the mentioned second point in the reading isn’t convincing to reject the evidence.
Thirdly, the passage claims that similar structure did not found between modern and fossils nest chambers. In fact, the main reason to formulate third reason is the lack of crab while the lecturer mentions to test outcome of the fossil which advocates the chemical composition similarities between modern and mentioned fossil. In the other words the same kind of water confirms the value of fossil.
- tpo36-integrated 3
- Some people believe that when busy parents do not have a lot of time to spend with their children, the best use of the that time is to have fun playing games or sports. Others believe that it is best to use that time doing things together that are related 73
- tpo33-integrated 75
- tpo28 80
- Tpo 45 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 113, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'bees'' or 'bee's'?
Suggestion: bees'; bee's
...n in the reading part which critics the bees existence. While, the professor claims ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 355, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'rejecting'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'convince' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: rejecting
...nt in the reading isn't convincing to reject the evidence. Thirdly, the passage c...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thirdly, while, in fact, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 22.412803532 40% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1310.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 255.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13725490196 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99608801488 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52239488795 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564705882353 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 389.7 419.366225166 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.8467475547 49.2860985944 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.166666667 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.25 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.66666666667 7.06452816374 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.0521252284647 0.272083759551 19% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0221868209586 0.0996497079465 22% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0225260024731 0.0662205650399 34% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0325230742742 0.162205337803 20% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0258356589833 0.0443174109184 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.