Flying birds through the buildings' glasses
The reading passage explains three different solutions that could be used in building glasses to prevent birds from flying through glass windows. However, the lecturer finds all the solutions discussed by the reading passage dubious and suggests some evidence to refute them all.
First, the reading passage claims that by using one-way glasses we could prevent birds harm. by doing so people can see buildings outside but glasses will be opaque for birds. On the contrary, the professor dismisses this idea due to the fact that one-way glasses are act as a mirror. So, when birds see the reflection of the sky and trees on the glasses' surface, they cannot distinguish between the reflect and the real. Therefore, it causes birds to get harmed by flying through the glasses.
Furthermore, the writer asserts that designing glasses with colorful lines can help birds to avoid flying through the glass. Conversely, the speaker underlines the fact that birds try to fly through open holes. So, the holes should be small such as birds do not attempt to fly through them. By doing so, enough sunlight does not enter the building inside and it will become dark.
Finally, the reading passage suggests that adding an artificial magnetic field can prevent birds from flying near the glasses because birds have an ability to sense Earth's magnetic fields. The lecturer, on the other hand, makes the argument that birds use this ability for flying in long distances. For instance, when they want to fly from a cold country to a warm one. However, they use their eyes for flying in short distances such as moving in a city. Therefore, this solution cannot be effective in preventing birds from injuries.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 93, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: By
...ay glasses we could prevent birds harm. by doing so people can see buildings outsi...
^^
Line 2, column 396, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...urface, they cannot distinguish between the reflect and the real. Therefore, it causes bird...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, so, therefore, for instance, in short, such as, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1411.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 284.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96830985915 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.32879082636 2.5805825403 90% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545774647887 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 404.1 419.366225166 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.7981303499 49.2860985944 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.1875 110.228320801 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.75 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.8125 7.06452816374 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.52417337993 0.272083759551 193% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.178059458459 0.0996497079465 179% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.128463857712 0.0662205650399 194% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.353608601896 0.162205337803 218% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.100188633825 0.0443174109184 226% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 71.14 53.8541721854 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 11.0289183223 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.25 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.59 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.