The article discusses a interesting topic pertaining to stop the spread of the cane toad in Australia and provides 3 ways to support it. However, the professor explain that this prevention will be unsuccessful and will cause unwanted damages to environment and author opposes each of the author's reasons.
First, the reading passage discusses that national fencing that will stop the advancement of toads. In contrast, the professor provides information that it will be unsuccessful attempt. She states that there will be some small points in fencing will cause the trespassing of young toads and eggs of toads and there will be stream of water and river that will be provides ways to advancement of cane toad. Clearly a disparity exists between the article and the evidence exhibited by the professor. As a result, we can safely assume that professor has proof that cast doubt on the reading passage.
Second, the article pushes forth the idea that cane toad could captured and destroyed by volunteers. However, the professor contends that by raising doubts regarding volunteers ability to identify the cane toads. According to professor, untrained volunteers could destroy native frogs which are in similar in look to the cane toads. Consequently, we can argue that indeed the claim made in reading is unsubstantiated and unpersuasive as it stands.
Finally, the reading posits that they can create a virus for cane toad that can kill their whole community in Australia. The professor refutes this point by explaining that it will be terrible consequences for environment. She states that this virus can also spread to North and south america and it will be ecological disaster. We also learns that the argument made by professor is raises doubt on the reading passage.
In summary, while reading passage and classroom discussion provide interesting information with regards to stop the spreading of cane toads, a significant amount of evidence supports that the ways described in passage is unpersuasive. Therefore, the reading passage fails to justify the claims towards its measures for prevention of cane toads in Australia.
- Claim: Many problems of modern society cannot be solved by laws and the legal system.Reason: Laws cannot change what is in people's hearts or minds. 50
- The human mind will always be superior to machines because machines are only tools of human minds. 50
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 54
- It is primarily through our identification with social groups that we define ourselves. 40
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station."Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less timeto weather and local news. During this period, most of the complaints 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 23, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
The article discusses a interesting topic pertaining to stop th...
^
Line 5, column 64, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'capture'
Suggestion: capture
...hes forth the idea that cane toad could captured and destroyed by volunteers. However, t...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 338, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'We' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'learn'
Suggestion: learn
...it will be ecological disaster. We also learns that the argument made by professor is ...
^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'consequently', 'finally', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'look', 'regarding', 'second', 'so', 'therefore', 'while', 'in contrast', 'in summary', 'as a result']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.296 0.261695866417 113% => OK
Verbs: 0.152 0.158904122519 96% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0506666666667 0.0723426182421 70% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0266666666667 0.0435111971325 61% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0346666666667 0.0277247811725 125% => OK
Prepositions: 0.130666666667 0.128828473217 101% => OK
Participles: 0.032 0.0370669169778 86% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.84790668454 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0266666666667 0.0208969081088 128% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.00154638098197 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.101333333333 0.128158765124 79% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0453333333333 0.0158828679856 285% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0133333333333 0.0114777025283 116% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2144.0 1645.83664459 130% => OK
No of words: 342.0 271.125827815 126% => OK
Chars per words: 6.26900584795 6.08160592843 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30037696126 4.04852973271 106% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.394736842105 0.374372842146 105% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.321637426901 0.287516216867 112% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.219298245614 0.187439937562 117% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.154970760234 0.113142543107 137% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84790668454 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482456140351 0.539623497131 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 49.5698001418 53.8517498576 92% => OK
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0529801325 130% => OK
Sentence length: 20.1176470588 21.7502111507 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.2348025533 49.3711431718 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.117647059 132.220823453 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1176470588 21.7502111507 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.882352941176 0.878197800319 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 3.39072847682 88% => OK
Readability: 52.2813897489 50.5018328374 104% => OK
Elegance: 2.15 1.90840788429 113% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.692469084886 0.549887131256 126% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.138227435499 0.142949733639 97% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0641598408824 0.0787303798458 81% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.605109536048 0.631733273073 96% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.12252174881 0.139662658121 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.31347999221 0.266732575781 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0981143700675 0.103435571967 95% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.393876495758 0.414875509568 95% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.097827802334 0.0530846634433 184% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.503470451193 0.40443939384 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0618159193693 0.0528353158467 117% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 4.45695364238 247% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.26048565121 23% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 5.0 3.49668874172 143% => OK
Negative topic words: 11.0 3.62251655629 304% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 3.1766004415 31% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 10.2958057395 165% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.