The reading passage proposed several ideas to protect frog population from being extincted. However, the professor casts doubt on each of these proposals and refutes them all by presenting some counter arguments.
First of all, the author states that as pesticides are deleterious for frogs, strict law should be applied prohibiting farmers to use pesticides near frog habitats. On contrast, the lecturer posits that the idea is not economically practical as farmers would loss crops if usage of pesticides is restricted. In the competitive market, if a farmer has abandon using pesticide it would have a huge impact on his income.
Secondly, the author brings up the idea of using medication and treatment to protect frogs from being infected by fungus. Nevertheless, the speaker challenges this idea and asserts that it is a tough job to capture and apply treatment to each frog individually. Also, as the medication is not passed genetically, so it need to be applied again and again to new generation. Thus, it would be a very complicated and expensive process.
Finally, according to the article, due to human activities, water and wetland habitats are being threatened which might cause extinction of frogs as they lay eggs in water. The author suggests that, protecting water habitats is required to save frog species. On the other hand, the lecturer contends that global warming is the main reason for disappearance of water and human activities does not have adverse effect on frog population.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, thus, as to, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1268.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 244.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19672131148 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95227774224 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85631922708 2.5805825403 111% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.610655737705 0.540411800872 113% => OK
syllable_count: 393.3 419.366225166 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.6866929336 49.2860985944 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.666666667 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3333333333 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.58333333333 7.06452816374 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.145869831719 0.272083759551 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0496381248977 0.0996497079465 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0396589916322 0.0662205650399 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0813548314283 0.162205337803 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0442714753487 0.0443174109184 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.88 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.29 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.