The lecture challenged all three solutions proposed in the passage to address the problem of decreasing frog numbers.
First, the lecturer disagrees with the proposal of passing laws to restrict pesticides using use near sensitive frog populations stated in the passage, believing it is neither ecologically practical (pragmatic) nor fair to some farmers. If such laws are enacted, farmers living close to the frog habitants will be significantly disadvantaged comparing to those who live further away from frog populations as not using pesticides will result in loss of crops and lower yields.
Second, the lecturer demonstrated uncertainties about applying antifungal medication and treatments to frogs because it is expensive and unsustainable. This treatment, argued by the lecturer, will not be effective to prevent fungus unless it is applied to individual frogs. In other words, it would be difficult and expensive to upscale the treatment to cover the entire frog population. To compound the matter, frogs are not able to pass such prevention to their offspring, meaning every newly born frog will need to be treated again. In other words, it would be difficult and expensive to upscale the treatment to cover the entire frog population.
Third, the passage suggests that excessive water and draining of wetlands by human beings are of major concern to the extinct of frogs, which is again challenged (opposed) by the lecturer, who indicated that global warming is in fact the core threat to the decline of frog populations among other water and wetland habitat. Building water habitats will not change the situation threatened by global warming and save the frogs.
Discourse Markers used:
['first', 'if', 'second', 'so', 'third', 'in fact', 'in other words']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.25 0.261695866417 96% => OK
Verbs: 0.177083333333 0.158904122519 111% => OK
Adjectives: 0.111111111111 0.0723426182421 154% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0381944444444 0.0435111971325 88% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0208333333333 0.0277247811725 75% => OK
Prepositions: 0.0972222222222 0.128828473217 75% => OK
Participles: 0.0659722222222 0.0370669169778 178% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.83816736984 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0625 0.0208969081088 299% => Less infinitives wanted.
Particles: 0.0 0.00154638098197 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0902777777778 0.128158765124 70% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0243055555556 0.0158828679856 153% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0104166666667 0.0114777025283 91% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1678.0 1645.83664459 102% => OK
No of words: 265.0 271.125827815 98% => OK
Chars per words: 6.3320754717 6.08160592843 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03470204552 4.04852973271 100% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.411320754717 0.374372842146 110% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.332075471698 0.287516216867 115% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.233962264151 0.187439937562 125% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.169811320755 0.113142543107 150% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83816736984 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.562264150943 0.539623497131 104% => OK
Word variations: 56.815545147 53.8517498576 106% => OK
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0529801325 77% => OK
Sentence length: 26.5 21.7502111507 122% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.5031653955 49.3711431718 141% => OK
Chars per sentence: 167.8 132.220823453 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.5 21.7502111507 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.7 0.878197800319 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.39072847682 0% => OK
Readability: 59.7075471698 50.5018328374 118% => OK
Elegance: 1.75 1.90840788429 92% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.577826414596 0.549887131256 105% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.171230258919 0.142949733639 120% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.054333494029 0.0787303798458 69% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.734983451703 0.631733273073 116% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.143552923513 0.139662658121 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.296346503063 0.266732575781 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.068160196694 0.103435571967 66% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.348313757502 0.414875509568 84% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.036486692706 0.0530846634433 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.396622824704 0.40443939384 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0586898656229 0.0528353158467 111% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.26048565121 0% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 0.0 3.49668874172 0% => More positive topic words wanted.
Negative topic words: 7.0 3.62251655629 193% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 3.1766004415 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 7.0 10.2958057395 68% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.