TPO43
The professor revises the idea presented in the text about the three theories that explain the way agnostids used to live and refutes each of the points made in the passage.
First of all, the reading passage proposes that the agnostids were free-swimming predators due to the fact that the other arthropods were good swimmers, too. The professor rejects this idea by explaining that these predators need large well-developed eyes to find and follow their preys. Agnostids, actually, had tiny poorly-developed eyes. Some of them were even blind. Thus, in order to be able to be a strong swimmer, agnostids needed other special sensational abilities, which have not been found in their fossils. So, the first theory has some deficiencies regarding the purpose of the passage.
Secondly, the professor’s opinion contradicts the second theory that says agnostids lived on the seafloor and ate dead organisms and bacteria. According to the professor, the seafloor dwellers do not have the ability to move fast. However, the fossils of agnostids have been discovered in different small geographic areas, far from each other. Thus, the agnostids were able to move fast over long distances. Therefore, this theory does not seem to be a good response to the main question of the passage.
Finally, the reading suggests that the agnostids were parasites living on larger organisms. The professor disagrees with this theory. He states that the population of the parasite is not usually large because they kill off the host organisms. On the other hand, research has shown that the population of the agnostids was extremely large. Thus, the third theory is not convincing, too.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-10-06 | Aliakbari94 | 80 | view |
| 2021-10-05 | Aliakbari94 | 70 | view |
| 2021-03-02 | taisuke571 | 85 | view |
| 2020-10-31 | nj-me | 70 | view |
| 2020-10-25 | 想不到一个好名字 | 80 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, finally, first, however, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thus, well, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => 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: 1411.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 270.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.22592592593 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79159280659 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.566666666667 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 424.8 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => 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: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.8122347618 49.2860985944 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.0 110.228320801 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.8823529412 21.698381199 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.82352941176 7.06452816374 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.414217003356 0.272083759551 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117373838407 0.0996497079465 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0854191512585 0.0662205650399 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.233879475619 0.162205337803 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0695033449198 0.0443174109184 157% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.3589403974 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.12 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.