Both the reading and the lecture discuss whether the bird population in the Us decrease or not. The former argues that due to three specific causes the bird's population will decrease or even decline whereas the latter contradicts all the three points made by the reading.
First of all, the author contends that due to the increase in human population more birds' habitable lands are given to the home and office or industrial building as a consequence the bird habitable zones are destroying as well as their population. In contrast, the lecturer argues that this point is taking an unnecessary argument, and in the urban area although some birds' population shrinks a little others grew much larger in the population.
Secondly, The reading asserts that due to the agriculture increase there needs more land and thus it causes more destruction to the bird's habitats that leads to further decreases in the bird population. However, the professor rebuts that, in recent times the amount of land use for agriculture in the US has been reduced, and with it, the introduction of new products that need less land to have high production the amount of land will further reduce. He also adds that within the development of genetic crops more production is now possible in fewer units of land and there is no need to destruction of the bird's habitats.
Finally, the text claims that in order to increase the number of groups the farmer uses chemically poisonous pesticides, and the bird's population is in danger as it may have a direct consequence to their food chain as well as can indirectly hamper their reproduction ability. On the other hand, the listening counters that, in practice, this claim is incorrectly projected to the history. He further argues that due to new technological development there are now fewer toxic pesticides and also scientists invent some mutants of crops that can genetically have pest resistance in them so that there is no need to use pesticides externally. So there are now greater resources si that there needs no use of pesticides and will not hamper the bird's population..
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate 50
- teacher 66
- 4 days work week 61
- The cane toad is a large (1.8 kg) amphibian species native to Central and South America. It was deliberately introduced to Australia in 1935 with the expectation that it would protect farmers' crops by eating harmful insects. Unfortunately, the toad 80
- Ethanol fuel, made from plants such as corn and sugar cane, has been advocated by some people as an alternative to gasoline in the United States. However, many critics argue that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline for several reasons.First, th 60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 153, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'birds'' or 'bird's'?
Suggestion: birds'; bird's
...s that due to three specific causes the birds population will decrease or even declin...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 369, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'birds'' or 'bird's'?
Suggestion: birds'; bird's
...nt, and in the urban area although some birds population shrinks a little others grew...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 403, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'other'?
Suggestion: other
... some birds population shrinks a little others grew much larger in the population. ...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 130, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'birds'' or 'bird's'?
Suggestion: birds'; bird's
...hemically poisonous pesticides, and the birds population is in danger as it may have ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 666, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'resources'' or 'resource's'?
Suggestion: resources'; resource's
...es externally. So there are now greater resources si that there needs no use of pesticide...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 741, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'birds'' or 'bird's'?
Suggestion: birds'; bird's
...e of pesticides and will not hamper the birds population..
^^^^^
Line 7, column 757, Rule ID: DOUBLE_PUNCTUATION
Message: Two consecutive dots
Suggestion: .
...and will not hamper the birds population..
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, thus, well, whereas, in contrast, as well as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 15.1003584229 73% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.0286738351 127% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 43.0788530466 63% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 52.1666666667 77% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 8.0752688172 260% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1758.0 1977.66487455 89% => OK
No of words: 354.0 407.700716846 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.96610169492 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33761313653 4.48103885553 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74961367669 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 212.727598566 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.491525423729 0.524837075471 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 546.3 618.680645161 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 9.59856630824 31% => OK
Article: 8.0 3.08781362007 259% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 20.6003584229 53% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 32.0 20.1344086022 159% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 59.1584229697 48.9658058833 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 159.818181818 100.406767564 159% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.1818181818 20.6045352989 156% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.0909090909 5.45110844103 240% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.5376344086 126% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 11.8709677419 17% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.315486905065 0.236089414692 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.146361625445 0.076458572812 191% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.102687873495 0.0737576698707 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.214558596753 0.150856017488 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0564553089122 0.0645574589148 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.1 11.7677419355 154% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.46 58.1214874552 82% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.1575268817 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.14 10.9000537634 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.01818996416 110% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 86.8835125448 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.002688172 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.0537634409 147% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.247311828 146% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
We are expecting: No. of Words: 350 while No. of Different Words: 200
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 61.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.5 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.