Some people think too much attention and too many resources are given to protection of wild animals and birds. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is stated that people have paid too much attention to wildlife protection and the resources distributed in this area is more than enough. I disagree with this statement.
Undeniably, compared to last few decades, people nowadays have been more aware of the importance of wildlife, and a* considerable amount of efforts have been made to protecting them. For example, it is the ever-increasing public donation and non-profit organizations with aim of wildlife protection that have created various preserves for a wide range of species, which have saved loads of endangered wild animals. Without those collective commitments made people or organizations from all walks of life, a number of endangered animals would have been extinct. However, the situation of wildlife protection is not as optimistic as how mass media describes, because the media tend to exaggerate the facts for its own sake. In some cases, the organizations that said to protect wildlife are doing token work, because due to corruption and the lack of monitoring, a large proportion of donated money raised by them is failing into authorities’ hands for private uses rather than being utilized to save lives of endangered animals. If these facts were not revealed by the media and were going to lastingly exist, wild animals and birds would still face a harsh situation and a high risk of extinction.
Except for the above problems that have impaired the effectiveness of protecting species, I think we can also find evidence from our experience. Although the media has been making every effort to arouse people’s consciousness of protecting wildlife, it is so remote to their life that they can hardly get an in-depth understanding of the necessity and importance of this issue. That is why many people turn off the TV or switch to another channel when there are wild animal protection programs on TV. Besides, the governments’ funding in this area insufficient, as they tend to allocate more resources to economy-catalyst areas such as infrastructure construction. Without the support of governments, the resources provided by organizations and individuals would be too limited to meet the need of wildlife protection.
The above analysis suggests that the conservation of wildlife neither attracts enough attention nor genuinely receives sufficient resources, making it necessary for us to raise public’s awareness of this vital but disregarded issue and to make resources genuinely reach the area in need.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, however, if, so, still, except for, for example, i think, such as, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 24.0651302605 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 57.0 41.998997996 136% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 8.3376753507 240% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2117.0 1615.20841683 131% => OK
No of words: 395.0 315.596192385 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35949367089 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45809453852 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18164097418 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 176.041082164 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.577215189873 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 671.4 506.74238477 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 20.2975951904 138% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 68.8089635832 49.4020404114 139% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.214285714 106.682146367 142% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.2142857143 20.7667163134 136% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.14285714286 7.06120827912 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.194206185584 0.244688304435 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0686959430819 0.084324248473 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.055167093887 0.0667982634062 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128904658559 0.151304729494 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0713529409935 0.056905535591 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.9 13.0946893788 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.6 50.2224549098 69% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.3001002004 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.1 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.14 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 78.4519038076 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.1190380762 130% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.