TPO 48
The reading and the lecture discuss probable methods for solving the problem related to decline the frog's population. The reading states that by using three methods this problem can be solved. However, from the lecturer's view, the mentioned methods have different drawbacks and they are not practical solutions. Hence she repudiates them all.
First, the article claims that exerting severe laws about the pesticides will decline the deleterious effects of them on the frogs. In contrast, the lecturer posits that prohibition the farmers for using the pesticides will have strong undesirable effects on their competition with the farmers of the other regions. Due to the paramount importance of using the pesticides in the production of crops, this strategy is not economical and fair. In fact, farmers will lose the potential markets when their production decrease.
Second, the author states that the presence of the fungus around the world has harmful effects on the frogs.On the contrary side, the professor argues that, treatment of the frogs can not be considered as a rational method because of a couple of reasons. First, for this purpose, each frog should be captured and treated, while applying this process to them individually is extremely difficult and even impossible to some extent. Second, the mentioned treatment process does not prevent the thread for their offsprings. Therefore, it is indispensable to repeat this procedure for each generation.
Finally, based on the reading's assertion human activities should be controlled effectively in order to prevent the damaging on the natural habitats which are suitable for the frogs.The lecturer opposes this point by saying that, the extant problems for the natural resources are not just depends on human activities. In fact, the most effective reason in this regard is the global warming phenomenon. Hence, it is unlikely that the protection of the lakes and marshes against the destructive human activities changes the impressive effects of the global warming. In brief, global warming has the stronger effects on natural habitats than the human activities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 101, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'frogs'' or 'frog's'?
Suggestion: frogs'; frog's
...ving the problem related to decline the frogs population. The reading states that by ...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 313, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...s and they are not practical solutions. Hence she repudiates them all. First, the ar...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 108, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: On
... world has harmful effects on the frogs.On the contrary side, the professor argues...
^^
Line 4, column 23, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'readings'' or 'reading's'?
Suggestion: readings'; reading's
...ach generation. Finally, based on the readings assertion human activities should be co...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 182, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...bitats which are suitable for the frogs.The lecturer opposes this point by saying t...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, hence, however, if, second, so, therefore, while, in brief, in contrast, in fact, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.01324503311 239% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1798.0 1373.03311258 131% => OK
No of words: 333.0 270.72406181 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3993993994 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70139441141 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.531531531532 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 540.9 419.366225166 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.5201378597 49.2860985944 143% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.375 110.228320801 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8125 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0625 7.06452816374 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.270725817965 0.272083759551 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0778437016537 0.0996497079465 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0491814879698 0.0662205650399 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.149482555473 0.162205337803 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0302669923616 0.0443174109184 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => 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: 14.04 12.2367328918 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.47 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 63.6247240618 160% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.