Summarise the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on specific points made in the reading passage. Methods to prevent frogs population from decreasing.
The text and the lecture offer two opposing views on the preventing frogs population's decline. While the reading passage lists three methods of deterring frogs' population's distinction, the professor refutes each reason by showing that they are impractical.
First, the article states that the prohibition of implementing pesticides in the farmlands which are neighbour to frogs habitats would be a solution. However, the lecturer rejects the proposed method by explaining that it is neither economically practical nor fair. He adds that if the farmers whose lands are near frog habitats have been forced not to use pesticides, then the overall amount of their product would become less than those competing farmers who are not under such force. Thus, it would not be fair.
Next, the passage claims that the medication of frogs with regard to a common deadly fungus would address the problem. On the contrary, the lecturer states that this medication should be applied to each frog individually. Consequently, taking into account the huge number of frogs which are in demand of such cure makes the proposed solution an inadequately costly project. Additionally, may be the disease transmits to the offsprings of the frogs, genetically, therefore, the medication should be repeated for all the generations of the frog, which exacerbate the situation.
Finally, the author posits that governments should limit the amount of water consumed by people in the regions where frogs live in the vicinity of a water body. In contrast, the professor repudiates the plan by stating that the main factor which damages water bodies today is not human consumption but global warming. According to the professor, this phenomenon has caused a lot of water bodies including lakes and wetland to become dry, so destroying the frogs habitats near them.
- Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of arts. 83
- Some people believe that nowadays we have too many choices. 84
- What celebrities state are of greater importance for young people rather than for older people. 76
- A tv station's business manager proposes to increase time of local news and weather news in late night news for some reasons. 82
- Sending Astronauts to Mars - The problems 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... by showing that they are impractical. First, the article states that the prohi...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 120, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'frog'.
Suggestion: frog
...in the farmlands which are neighbour to frogs habitats would be a solution. However, ...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uch force. Thus, it would not be fair. Next, the passage claims that the medica...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... frog, which exacerbate the situation. Finally, the author posits that governme...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, first, however, if, may, so, then, therefore, thus, while, in contrast, in fact, on the contrary, with regard to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1543.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 293.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2662116041 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13729897018 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77747348008 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 145.348785872 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59385665529 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 468.9 419.366225166 112% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.5445602262 49.2860985944 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.692307692 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5384615385 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.7692307692 7.06452816374 152% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
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: 0.134603539475 0.272083759551 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0511807694979 0.0996497079465 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0366308913263 0.0662205650399 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0869469171207 0.162205337803 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0518928038503 0.0443174109184 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.3589403974 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.47 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 63.6247240618 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27 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.