The reading and the lecture are both about the cane toad, which is a species of frog. This frog was introduced in Australia in order to annihilate some dangerous insects, but its activity put in danger other native species. The writer talks about some effective methods to eradicate this species. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article.
First, building a national fence is not effective because there are other ways the frog uses for reaching different parts of Australia. Water and streams are a successful way of transportation for eggs and young frogs. Not to mention that, it is enough only for a small number to reach a new area in order to create a new population. Therefore, if a small number of eggs or youngsters have access to water, it would be enough to start the colonization of a new land. This is a strong counter-point to the author's point of view.
Second, generally the volunteers are locals who have no special skills or training in catching cane toads. Yes, they can catch and destroy a great number of them, but the risk to damage the native ecosystem is very high. In other words, it is very likely for them to destroy Australian native frogs. This is because the appearance of some species resembles a lot. This is another standpoint that contradicts the passage.
Third, if researchers release a virus in the nature, various species can be affected both in Australia and in Central and South America. This is possible due to the fact that the virus might be transmitted to pets. If a certain pet travels from Australia to America, it will infect other animals, conducting to disastrous results. Moreover, this might mean the end of a species. Thus, this argument can not be considered as being valid. In conclusion, the author and the lecturer appear to be in disagreement regarding this topic.
- TPO-40 - Integrated Writing Task Many scientists believe it would be possible to maintain a permanent human presence on Mars or the Moon. On the other hand, conditions on Venus are so extreme and inhospitable that maintaining a human presence there would 60
- In some countries, people are no longer allowed to smoke in many public places and office buildings. Do you think this is a good rule or a bad rule? Use specific reasons and details to support your position. 76
- TPO-25 - Integrated Writing Task In 1938 an archaeologist in Iraq acquired a set of clay jars that had been excavated two years earlier by villagers constructing a railroad line. The vessel was about 2,200 years old. Each clay jay contained a copper cylin 81
- Some people trust their first impressions about a person’s character because they believe these judgments are generally correct. Other people do not judge a person’s character quickly because they believe first impressions are often wrong. Compare the 83
- You have decided to give several hours of your time each month to improve the community where you live. What is one thing you will do to improve your community? Why? 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 349, Rule ID: SMALL_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, use 'a few', or use 'some'
Suggestion: a few; some
... create a new population. Therefore, if a small number of eggs or youngsters have access to water...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 233, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'travel'?
Suggestion: travel
...e transmitted to pets. If a certain pet travels from Australia to America, it will infe...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, moreover, regarding, second, so, therefore, third, thus, in conclusion, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 10.4613686534 191% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 12.0772626932 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1530.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 319.0 270.72406181 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.79623824451 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22617688928 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67720775393 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 145.348785872 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.548589341693 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 470.7 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 3.25607064018 369% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.5842441174 49.2860985944 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 76.5 110.228320801 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.95 21.698381199 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.1 7.06452816374 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.293913484718 0.272083759551 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0724674146567 0.0996497079465 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0478685651302 0.0662205650399 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.149476273587 0.162205337803 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0439474313012 0.0443174109184 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.2 13.3589403974 69% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 53.8541721854 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 11.0289183223 73% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.26 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.85 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 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.