Glass windows harming birds
The author proposes several solutions in the reading passage to prevent birds from crashing into glass windows. Although these points seem reasonable, the lecturer casts doubt on them, indicating that birds may still be hurt.
To begin with, the author suggests that we can replace regular glasses with one-way windows, which are transparent in only one direction. Thereby, birds can identify the glass and avoid flying into it. Conversely, the lecturer points out that one-way windows, similar to mirrors, will induce reflections and birds are not familiar with mirrors as well. As a result, birds probably won’t divert their flying directions upon seeing mirrors and will still be harmed.
Second, even though the author alleges that people can paint windows with colorful lines and stripes, helping birds avoid windows, the lecturer argues that it is a misconception. This is because there will be some blanks without colorful designs remaining. Birds will refer to these blanks as holes, trying to fly through them as usual. Furthermore, the lecturer claims that, in an attempt to stop the damage to birds, we might need to cover all portions of windows with color. Nonetheless, it will block the visions and the light of the occupants of buildings. Accordingly, the lecturer dismisses this colorful design solution.
Last but not least, the lecturer acutely identifies a weakness in the reading passage that we can establish an artificial magnetic field by equipping electromagnets around buildings to guide birds’ direction away from buildings since birds have the ability to sense magnetic fields. She indicates that birds only harness magnetic fields when they migrate long distances, meaning that magnetic fields won’t have much effect on short-distance traveling such as passing across cities. Consequently, the lecturer believes that this magnet manner isn't effective.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-15 | nusybah | 88 | view |
| 2023-06-27 | YasamanEsml | 80 | view |
| 2023-06-15 | Vivian Chang | 78 | view |
| 2023-02-26 | rodriannnn | 76 | view |
| 2023-01-29 | reza_fattahi | 80 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 543, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...cturer believes that this magnet manner isnt effective.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, consequently, conversely, furthermore, if, may, nonetheless, second, so, still, well, such as, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1602.0 1373.03311258 117% => OK
No of words: 293.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.46757679181 5.08290768461 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13729897018 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60851346716 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 145.348785872 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.61433447099 0.540411800872 114% => OK
syllable_count: 459.9 419.366225166 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => 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: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.4372788172 49.2860985944 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.8 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5333333333 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.26666666667 7.06452816374 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => 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: 0.216108092489 0.272083759551 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0708583966354 0.0996497079465 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0594494024476 0.0662205650399 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130114322195 0.162205337803 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0346496464132 0.0443174109184 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.2367328918 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.94 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 63.6247240618 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.