Cane toads
In this set of materials, the writer strongly postulates that several measures have been proposed to stop the spread of cane tode in Australia and explains three ways to endorse his idea. However, the professor states that the measures mentioned by the author cannot stop the spread of cane toad and gainsays every argument mentioned in the passage.
First and foremost, the passage begins by asserting that a way to reduce the population of toads is to build a national fence to prevent the movement of toads to other areas of Australia, like the spread of rabbits was prevented back in the early part of the twentieth century to save the native ecosystem. However, the professor does not think that a national fence would be effective in minimizing the spread of toads because he believes that young toads and eggs can get transferred through rivers and streams flowing to other parts of the national fence.
Next, the professor in the lecture focuses on other reasons that capturing the toads through volunteers by organizing a campaign will destroy the native frogs of Australia. This claim refutes the author's implication of reducing the spread of toads by gathering and destroy young toads and cane toads eggs by Australian citizens.
Ultimately, the article wraps its arguments by declaring that researchers are developing a virus that will cause a disease in reptiles and amphibians but specifically toads that will prevent them from maturing and reproducing. However, the speaker in the listening refutes this point by insisting on the inaccuracy of this idea. He thinks this will be an ecological disaster because the virus will spread to the King toads of America when infected reptiles and amphibians were transported to America. This will ultimately destroy the King species of toads that are a vital part of the ecosystem.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 197, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...three ways to endorse his idea. However, the professor states that the measures m...
^^
Line 5, column 197, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...gs of Australia. This claim refutes the authors implication of reducing the spread of t...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 30.3222958057 158% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1543.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 303.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09240924092 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17215713816 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66201437134 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501650165017 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 474.3 419.366225166 113% => 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: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 30.0 21.2450331126 141% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 61.4414355301 49.2860985944 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 154.3 110.228320801 140% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.3 21.698381199 140% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.7 7.06452816374 38% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.357966293387 0.272083759551 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.150015449684 0.0996497079465 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.122987735998 0.0662205650399 186% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.231769106806 0.162205337803 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.103880821546 0.0443174109184 234% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 13.3589403974 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.03 53.8541721854 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.0289183223 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.24 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 63.6247240618 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 10.7273730684 163% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 10.498013245 133% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 11.2008830022 161% => 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.