First, replacing regular glass with one -way glass. Well, the problem with one-way glass is that to the bird on the outside, a one -way glass surface reflects just like a mirror, and a surface that reflects like a mirror is just as bad as regular glass for birds because birds don't understand the mirrors. If they see a reflection of the sky in a mirror or of a tree in a mirror, they'd think the reflection is the sky or is the tree. And they'll fly right into them.
The second solution, painting colorful patterns like stripes on regular glass, also has problems. As the reading said, these designs include openings so people inside the buildings can see out, but birds will perceive these unpainted openings as open holes. And if bir ds think that they are seeing holes, they'll try to fly right through them. To prevent birds from doing this, the unpainted spaces in a window would have to be extremely small, but that would then make the rooms of the buildings too dark for the people inside them.
The third solution, creating an artificial magnetic field, won't work very well either. While it's true that birds use Earth's magnetic field to help them navigate, they use this only when they are travelling very long distances. For example, if a bird is migrating from a cold country to a warm one before winter, it will use its magnetic sense to figure out which way it should fly. But this ability isn't used to go over short distances, such as going from one side of the city to another. For short trips, birds use their eyes and the brightness of light to determine where to go. So magnetic signals from buildings won't have much effect.
The article states that birds cannot differentiate between glass and open air, and it is more likely that birds damaged by glasses. So, it provides three solutions to cope this problem. However, the professor explains that these solutions are not stop birds to get injuries and refutes each of the author's solutions.
First, the reading claims that transparent glass, clear glass with only one-way direction, could be effective. The professor casts doubt on this point by explaining that transparent glass is as harmful as clear glass because it reflects light like mirror, which reflect shy or trees in surrounding areas, and birds cannot distinguish between mirror and clear glass.
Second, the article posits that painting glass like using colored lines or other designs is another solution. In contrast, the professor says that painting on glass could not be much effective because provides situations that people inside the building might be unable to see outside of the building due to lack of light and dark circumstances.
Third, the reading says that by using magnetic field around the glass birds could get away from the buildings. The professor opposes this point by saying that birds use their magnetic field to navigate for long distances in order to find out their ways, flying from cold region to warm region is one example of using this mechanism, but for short distances, like form flying one part of the city to another part, birds use their eyes and light. According to the professor, this solution would not be effective.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, so, third, in contrast
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 : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1297.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 254.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.1062992126 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99216450694 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44314417051 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.55905511811 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 368.1 419.366225166 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => 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: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 85.7629873547 49.2860985944 174% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.7 110.228320801 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.4 21.698381199 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 7.06452816374 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.346720689408 0.272083759551 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.131614799431 0.0996497079465 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112493527293 0.0662205650399 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.208507949327 0.162205337803 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.131333262617 0.0443174109184 296% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 63.02 53.8541721854 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.98 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 50.0 63.6247240618 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.