TPO42
The reading passage deals with the issue of the possible solutions to prevent birds from hitting the glass building. The professor's talk focuses on the same issue. However, he believes that the solutions mentioned in the reading will not effectively stop the birds. And in the lecture, the professor makes three specific points to back up his point of view.
In the first place, even though the reading passage suggests that we can change the regular transparent glass into one-way glass which can only been see through from one direction, the professor claims in the lecture that this solution will not work. This is because the outside way of the glass will reflect views like a mirror, which means birds can see the sky and trees outside from the glass and as a result, they will definitely fly to the glass. Apparently, the professor's argument disproves its counterpart in the reading.
In the second place, contrary to the statement in the reading that there's another solution to paint colorful stripes on the glass, the professor argues that it won't success either. Then he supports this point with the fact that birds will consider the spaces between two stripes as open holes which will lead them to fly toward it. Besides, if we paint those fringes closer to each other, it would be extremely dark inside the room.
Further, the professor states that artificial magnetic field can guide birds to fly elsewhere while the author of the reading claims that this method is useless. The professor shows that this claim is very weak by pointing out that magnetic field is only used when birds are migrating long distance.
To sum up, the professor precisely discovers the flaws in the reading passage and successfully reveals that the main argument in the reading is incorrect.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-04-10 | KimiaKermanshahian | 80 | view |
| 2022-04-20 | lhklin | 70 | view |
| 2021-10-25 | DarkSaitama | 70 | view |
| 2021-09-21 | Maryam_zn | 70 | view |
| 2021-04-22 | incoco | 80 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 470, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
...itely fly to the glass. Apparently, the professors argument disproves its counterpart in t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 68, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: there's
...ry to the statement in the reading that theres another solution to paint colorful stri...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, besides, first, however, if, second, so, then, while, as a result, to sum up, in the first place, in the second place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1491.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 302.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93708609272 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1687104957 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.35784143947 2.5805825403 91% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.549668874172 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 432.0 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.2257667725 49.2860985944 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.692307692 110.228320801 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2307692308 21.698381199 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.92307692308 7.06452816374 140% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.358290801494 0.272083759551 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.116260448753 0.0996497079465 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.10239343371 0.0662205650399 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.178239920038 0.162205337803 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.116403780679 0.0443174109184 263% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 13.3589403974 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 65.05 53.8541721854 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.67 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.97 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.