TPO42
Both the passage and the lecture are about the effect of glass in the architecture of a building which can harm the birds. The author in the passage asserts that there are three ways to prevent them from being harmed. However, the professor finds the idea dubious and presents some evidence to refute all the reasons.
First, the reading asserts that one-way glasses can be used in buildings because birds will understand that they are solid barriers and they will not fly through them. On the contrary, the lecturer brings up the idea that these one-way glasses will act as a mirror so the birds generally do not understand how to behave with mirrors. As a result, they see the sky and also other birds in the glasses and imagine it is a sky thus, they will fly through them. Therefore these glasses will eventually harm them.
Furthermore, the author holds the view that colorful designs on window glasses which have stripes will prevent birds to fly through glasses. In contrast, the professor underlines the fact that birds consider these opening places, that are not painted, as a whole. Thus, the birds will try to fly through them. To prevent this situation, architectures should put small unpainted spots but this is not practical because the inside of the building will be so dark.
Finally, the article claims that the magnetic field can guide birds away from buildings because birds are capable to understand the magnetic fields for the navigation. Conversely, the speaker dismisses this issue, pointing out that birds use Earth's magnetic field for navigation only in long distances. Birds do not use this ability in their short trips. In short distances, they use light and their eyes for navigating. As a result, this magnetic field is not much effective.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-04-10 | KimiaKermanshahian | 80 | view |
| 2022-04-20 | lhklin | 70 | view |
| 2021-10-25 | DarkSaitama | 70 | view |
| 2021-09-21 | Maryam_zn | 70 | view |
| 2021-04-22 | incoco | 80 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 459, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...a sky thus, they will fly through them. Therefore these glasses will eventually harm them...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, so, therefore, thus, in contrast, in short, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1475.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 300.0 270.72406181 111% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91666666667 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42222120285 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496666666667 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 431.1 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.2028283218 49.2860985944 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.1875 110.228320801 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.75 21.698381199 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.3125 7.06452816374 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => 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: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.49884454796 0.272083759551 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.159742572175 0.0996497079465 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.105681942024 0.0662205650399 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.271053281595 0.162205337803 167% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.101679776059 0.0443174109184 229% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.3589403974 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 70.13 53.8541721854 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 11.0289183223 72% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.42 8.42419426049 88% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.