Both the reading and the lecture are arguing over the solutions that have been proposed to slowdown the decline in frog populations. The author of the reading offers three possible solutions and provides three points of support. However, the lecturer refutes each point presented in the article. He thinks that none of these suggested solutions are practical.
First of all, the reading posits that in order to tackle the problem of frog populations extinction, the government should establish laws that prohibit the farmer from using harmful pesticides near sensitive frog population. However, the professor opposes this idea by explaining that if the farmer follow this strict rules, they will be less competitive than their competitors in the market and also will have less yield. Having said that, the farmer will be at severe disadvantage.
Moreover, the author suggested the using of anti fungal medication will be effective to treat infected frogs from fungs infection. It is also mentioned that this fungus infection make the frog's skin more thicker which cause dehydration to frogs. On the other hand, the professor challenged this point. He argues that this solution is extremely difficult because it will require trace each individual frog to apply the medication and doing that at large scale will be incredibly daunting. Also, the anti fungal medication will not stop the frog from spread this infection to its subsequent generations.
Finally, the professor rebutted the idea in the article that forbidding humans from using water and reclaim the wetland to their benefits will solve the problem. He argues that the main reason for water dwindling is not the excessive use of water or human activities, rather it is the global warming. Thus stopping human activities will not reverse the frog population decline that triggered by global warming.
- TPO integrated 44 73
- Because the world is changing so quickly, people now are less happy or less satisfied with their lives than people were in the past 70
- Successful people try new things and take risks rather than only doing what they knowhow to do well. 70
- TPO-12 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is better to have broad knowledge of many academic subjects than to specialize in one specific subject.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
- TPO-01 - Integrated Writing Task In the United States, employees typically work five days a week for eight hours each day. However, many employees want to work a four-day week and are willing to accept less pay inorder to do so. A mandatory policy requiri 81
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Both the reading and the lecture are arg...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... suggested solutions are practical. First of all, the reading posits that in...
^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... will be at severe disadvantage. Moreover, the author suggested the using...
^^
Line 7, column 202, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'thicker' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: thicker
...is fungus infection make the frogs skin more thicker which cause dehydration to frogs. On th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 10, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ion to its subsequent generations. Finally, the professor rebutted the idea...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, so, thus, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => 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: 1578.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 297.0 270.72406181 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31313131313 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15134772569 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59762945939 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558922558923 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 475.2 419.366225166 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.2808114493 49.2860985944 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.2 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8 21.698381199 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.06666666667 7.06452816374 86% => 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 : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.344071011499 0.272083759551 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.114491345905 0.0996497079465 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0899972083308 0.0662205650399 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.20062720636 0.162205337803 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0642470997363 0.0443174109184 145% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 13.3589403974 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.99 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 63.6247240618 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.