Glass is a favored building material for modern architecture, yet it is also very dangerous for wild birds. Because they often cannot distinguish between glass and open air, millions of birds are harmed every year when they try to fly through glass windows. There are, however, several solutions that responsible businesses can use to prevent injuries to birds.
One-Way Glass
One solution is to replace the regular, clear glass with one-way glass that is transparent in only one direction. The occupants of the building can see out, but birds and others cannot see in. If birds cannot see through a window, they will understand that the glass forms a solid barrier and will not try to fly through it.
Colorful Designs
A second solution is to paint colorful lines or other designs on regular window glass. For example, a window could have a design of thin stripes painted over the glass. People would still be able to see through the openings in the design where there is no paint, while birds would see the stripes and thus avoid trying to fly through the glass. Architects can be encouraged to include colorful painted patterns on glass as part of the general design of buildings.
Magnetic Field
The third solution is to create an artificial magnetic field to guide birds away from buildings. Humans use an instrument called a magnetic compass to determine directions—either north, south, east, or west. Bird research has shown that birds have a natural ability to sense Earth's magnetic fields; this ability works just like a compass, and it helps birds navigate in the right direction when they fly. A building in a bird flight path can be equipped with powerful electromagnets that emit magnetic signals that steer birds in a direction away from the building.
The article provides several solutions that responsible businesses can use to prevent injuries to birds which cannot distinguish between glass and open air. However, the professor argues that those solutions are not effectively stopping the injuries happen for the following reasons.
First, one of the solutions the article provides is replacing the regular glass with one-way glass. Nevertheless, the professor opposes that the one-way glass would reflect like a mirror, which birds do not understand the function of it. For example, if the reflection shows a tree or the sky, birds would think the reflection as the reality and fly to it. Therefore, it would not solve the problem of the topic.
Second, the article asserts that we can paint colorful lines or other design on regular window glass but people would still be able to see through the openings in the design. However, the professor argues that birds would see open holes in the design as the hole which is open air. Thus, they would still try to fly right through it. Moreover, the only way to prevent the situation from happening is to make the unpainting part extremely small. He opposes to the mean by explaining it would make the room too dark since the hole is too small to let the sunlight comes in.
Finally, the article states that we can create an artificial magnetic field to guide birds away from buildings that bird research has shown the birds have a natural ability to sense the direction when they fly. The professor argues that birds are only using the ability when they are traveling in long-distance like migrating from a cold place to a warmer one. They would nor use the ability when they traveling in short-distance. Therefore, birds would still use their own eyes to distinguish the direction while flying to a building.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, second, so, still, therefore, thus, while, for example, in short
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 5.04856512141 257% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1507.0 1373.03311258 110% => OK
No of words: 307.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90879478827 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18585898806 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52965519957 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 145.348785872 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511400651466 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 455.4 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.7063810732 49.2860985944 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.466666667 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4666666667 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.13333333333 7.06452816374 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.242327781426 0.272083759551 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0829952239302 0.0996497079465 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0540567959522 0.0662205650399 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.146478177279 0.162205337803 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0165516005312 0.0443174109184 37% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.2 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.56 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.5 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.