In this set of materials, the reading passage discusses new solutions to prevent bird’s injury by new buildings due to use of glass in them. The lecturer, who states none of these ways are effective, challenges them claim by stating that the different aspects of the reading might draw an incorrect conclusion based on the evidence and assumption.
First, the author claims that one-way glass would be a proper solution. Conversely, the lecturer argues the idea, that such statement based on the unsupported assumption. The one-way glass, he states that, works as a mirror. But the problem is bird do not understand mirror. So by seeing reflect of sky or three, birds perceive them as real and going through that.
Second, the passage is concerned with the designs on the regular glass windows. The lecturer clearly disagrees with the concept presented in the text; he thinks, the passage overlooked the idea that in this way people inside the building have to open their window and bird perceive this openness as a hole, so they going thorough that. The professor mentions that the only solution would be to make this opening so small, which on the other hand results in the darkness of the inside of the building.
Third, despite the fact that the author of the passage thinks that artificial magnetic field can make the bird go away, the speaker feels that it is again a weak conclusion.
Since bird only use their magnetic sense for traveling for long distance, such as traveling long way from cold region to the warm one. But in their daily trip, which is short, they use their eyes and light of day. In conclusion this way is again a failure in solving the main problem.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 367, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ve them as real and going through that. Second, the passage is concerned with th...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, first, if, look, second, so, third, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1403.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 291.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.82130584192 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13022058845 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.43549776564 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.560137457045 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 409.5 419.366225166 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.116997792494 855% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.0533776175 49.2860985944 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.214285714 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7857142857 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.71428571429 7.06452816374 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => 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: 0.338929249917 0.272083759551 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108083273206 0.0996497079465 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0624354808128 0.0662205650399 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167895674812 0.162205337803 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0496449538359 0.0443174109184 112% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 53.8541721854 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 10.68 12.2367328918 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.94 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => The average readability is low. Need to improve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.