TPO-45 - Integrated Writing Task
Any student of paleontology will be struck by the fact that a great many animals of the past were considerably larger than they are today. This holds true for species ranging from dinosaurs to most mammals. Just why they were so large calls for some explanation. A rough consensus has been reached on the following points.
The first is that the large size of the animals must be due to the early earth’s greater supply of oxygen. It is held by some reputable biologists that an oxygen-rich environment stimulates growth within a species and produces an array of large animal varieties.
A second point is that the abundant plant life on the early earth must have provided all species with plenty of nutrients. As biologists now know, adequate nutrition is vital for animals to fully grow. It is believed that this size increase gets genetically transmitted over generations. Thus, so long as the food supply remains adequate, animal species will tend to get bigger over time.
Finally, some researchers believe that the early earth’s warm climate tended to stimulate growth. Since the animals did not expend much energy to stay warm, the extra energy could be channeled into generating cells needed for larger bodies. Taking this view, the high oxygen levels, abundant food and warm weather all converged to produce animals of considerably larger dimensions than is the norm today.
The author of the reading passage presents three explanations for the greater size of animals in the past. Nevertheless, the lecturer claims these are either unsupported or wrong and offers three reasons.
First, the professor suggests the oxygen was not abundant. According to him, a lot of volcanos were active, and they released the toxic gas into the atmosphere. Because of this, the amount of the oxygen was less than that of today.
Secondly, the lecturer challenges the author’s point that the animals benefited from the vast amount of nutrients from the plants. Although he acknowledges the abundance of the vegetation, he notes the plants did not contain a high level of nutrients because most of the carbon dioxide, an essential nutrient for the plants, was contaminated. Specifically, he cites fossil records showing the scarcity of the nutrients in the plants and concludes those plants did not facilitate the growth of animals.
Lastly, the lecturer posits the warm climate is disadvantageous to the creatures. He points out the fact that some people are small while the temperature is relatively high. Moreover, he argues releasing heat after eating food is critical for the body’s growth. Since the warmth surrounded the animals’ bodies, he claims the animals could not cool off enough, and this hindered the growth.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-07-15 | TBT | 75 | view |
| 2018-10-08 | Sabarnakha | 3 | view |
| 2018-10-08 | mamadaghaaa | 60 | view |
| 2018-10-06 | zahra.mz70@gmail.com | 80 | view |
| 2018-10-05 | mrunalijagdale5@gmail.com | 73 | view |
Comments
Tell the truth, I have sent
Tell the truth, I have sent you several native speakers' essays. But e-graders evaluated low. I think convincing students (it is "true" assessment) is unfair. Because we believe in you.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The author of the reading passage presen...
^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ed or wrong and offers three reasons. First, the professor suggests the oxygen...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e oxygen was less than that of today. Secondly, the lecturer challenges the au...
^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...not facilitate the growth of animals. Lastly, the lecturer posits the warm cli...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, lastly, moreover, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 12.0772626932 25% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1137.0 1373.03311258 83% => OK
No of words: 215.0 270.72406181 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28837209302 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82921379641 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87769061907 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 145.348785872 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.609302325581 0.540411800872 113% => OK
syllable_count: 339.3 419.366225166 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.5154291598 49.2860985944 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.75 110.228320801 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9166666667 21.698381199 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.83333333333 7.06452816374 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.211681328979 0.272083759551 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.073121594787 0.0996497079465 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0472771026306 0.0662205650399 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117180919218 0.162205337803 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0314463462472 0.0443174109184 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.25 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.