tpo 48
The reading passage embraces the idea that the population of frogs is declining at a very swift pace and this reduction might create a deleterious effect on the entire ecosystem due to the fact that frogs play a consequential role in the environment like helping humans shun from different diseases. Indeed, there are several tasks to prevent decline of frogs' population. However, the lecturer finds all the ideas dubious and presents some evidence to refute them all.
First, the author holds the view that pesticides have pernicious effects on frogs because they enter the body of the frogs and influence nervous system negatively. So, they should be prohibited from farmlands. In contrast, the lecturer underlines the fact that diminish the pesticide is not economically practical due to the fact that it is beneficial for the farmers and help them to compete in open markets. If farmers keep track of strict rules, they might not be able to take advantages of pesticides.
The author also asserts that fungus plays a key role in the reduction of frogs' population because it causes the thickening of the skin and dehydration. So, a suitable antifungal remedy can provide an opportunity for the population to be recovered. Conversely, the professor brings up the idea that this treatment and remedy should be applied individually which is a hard task to do because it needs capturing of frogs one by one. Also, if it became successful, it could not protect offspring. So, it would be a sophisticated and expensive process.
Finally, as set forth by the author human beings also have negative effects on frogs 'population because they threaten the water, which frogs lay their eggs. On the contrary, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that water and wetland habitats are not safe for the population. Indeed, global warming is of utmost importance issues because not only can it disappears the water but also it can endanger frogs' population.
Having scrutinized all the ideas, a logical conclusion that can be drawn is that there are pieces of information having been ignored by the author while the presence of which could strengthen the author's claim.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, finally, first, however, if, so, then, while, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 5.01324503311 339% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1822.0 1373.03311258 133% => OK
No of words: 360.0 270.72406181 133% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06111111111 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35587717469 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74972501431 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 145.348785872 133% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536111111111 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 567.9 419.366225166 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => 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: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.704356781 49.2860985944 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.875 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0625 7.06452816374 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
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: 0.384418994139 0.272083759551 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120687702228 0.0996497079465 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0990496730834 0.0662205650399 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.198562613276 0.162205337803 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0814273739661 0.0443174109184 184% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => 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: 12.36 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.03 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 63.6247240618 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.