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 passage is mainly about three solutions which can avoid glass to make birds injured. However, the professor in the lecture disagrees. He thinks that none of these solutions can stop birds from injuring.
First of all, the one-way glass would look like mirror from outside of building, which means that it would reflect sky or trees. Nevertheless, birds can not understand mirror, and they would perceive these reflections as the real sky and trees. In turn, birds would hit one-way glass because they think it is open air.
Second, it is not possible for colorful designs to reduce birds injury. To be more specific, birds would perceive the openings of the strips as open holes, and fly right though them. In contrast, if the strips are extremely closed to each other, then it would be too dark for people who stay inside of the building.
Thrid, the solution of creating an artificial magnetic field would not work at all. The professor refutes the statement by giving the fact that, birds only nevigate by magnetic field while they are travelling for long distance. Instead of migration from cold place to warm place, travelling from one city to another city only require the sight of the birds and the blight of the lights. That is why the artificial magnetic field can not successfully guide birds way from buildings.
To sum up, the professor disagrees the three solutions, one-way glass, colorful design and magnetic field in the article by providing further explanations to proof that they are not effective solutions for prevent injuries to birds.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, look, nevertheless, second, so, then, while, in contrast, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1310.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 263.0 270.72406181 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98098859316 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02706775958 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.43338878223 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 145.348785872 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558935361217 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 380.7 419.366225166 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.5728280125 49.2860985944 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.5714285714 110.228320801 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7857142857 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.21428571429 7.06452816374 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.219406943587 0.272083759551 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0829344283926 0.0996497079465 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0681666844467 0.0662205650399 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.121572578077 0.162205337803 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0302317373164 0.0443174109184 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 70.13 53.8541721854 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 11.0289183223 72% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.71 8.42419426049 92% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.