TPO48
The author of the reading suggests that there are some solutions for solving the problem of declining the population of frogs around the world. The lecturer, however, finds the solutions non-practical and casts doubt on the points mentioned by the reading passage.
First of all, the author asserts that using pesticides is one of the crucial reasons for declining the population of frogs. Therefore, laws should forbid the farmers whose farms are near endangered frogs' population for using these harmful pesticides. Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that this is not economical and fair for these farmers compare to farmers in other areas. If farmers do not use these chemicals to reduce the detrimental effect of damaging insects for their crops, their production yield significantly will decrease.
Furthermore, the reading passage holds the view that fungus which spreads around the globe, leads to dehydration of frogs; as a result, they will die very soon. Thus, we have to treat the infected frogs with new treatment which recently discovered by researchers. On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that this treatment should be applied for every individual of frogs, which is arduous. Besides, this treatment cannot passed to the offsprings of these amphibians. Accordingly, this treatment should be used for every generation again and again, which is complicated and expensive.
Finally, the reading mentioned that the natural habitat of these aminals destroyed by human activity. Hence, we have to protect their habitat by preventing excessive water use. In contrast, the speaker dismisses this issue since the main threaten for the frogs' population is global warming, not human activity. As a result, we cannot protect their habitat by limiting the water use by humans.
- TPO28 75
- Do you agree with the following statement The government should support scientific research even if there s no practical use 66
- TPO37 3
- TPO22-Integrated writing 66
- Do you agree with the following statement? The government should support scientific research even if there’s no practical use. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 256, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'frogs'' or 'frog's'?
Suggestion: frogs'; frog's
...s issue since the main threaten for the frogs population is global warming, not human...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, besides, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, so, therefore, thus, in contrast, as a result, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1527.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 284.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37676056338 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72263712713 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 145.348785872 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.552816901408 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 457.2 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 26.5567735657 49.2860985944 54% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 101.8 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.9333333333 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.6 7.06452816374 150% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => 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: 0.365184409421 0.272083759551 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120187123746 0.0996497079465 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.083155376045 0.0662205650399 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.207889512006 0.162205337803 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0583003437876 0.0443174109184 132% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.2367328918 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.7273730684 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.