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 T

Essay topics:

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 held 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 reading and the lecture are both about proposed solutions to protect birds from hitting building's glasses. The author of the reading feels that three solutions can be applied to protect birds. The lecturer challenges the claims made by the author. He believes that none of the solutions would effectively stop birds' injury.

To begin with, the author argues that the first solution is using one-way glass. The article mentions that one-way glass would allow the people inside the building to see the outside while birds cannot see through it. The lecturer challenges this specific argument. He claims that the one-way glass appears as a mirror from outside. Additionally, he says that birds do not understand the mirror so, they would try to fly through the mirror.

Secondly, the writer suggests that colorful designs would help in this situation. In the article, the writer says that using patterns and lines on the windows would prevent the birds from flying through them. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by mentioning that this type of design has openings on the windows and the birds would fly through these holes. He elaborates on this by bringing up the point that the openings on the windows should be extremely small and this would make the room darker.

Finally, the author posits that the magnetic can be used to direct birds away from the buildings. In contrast, the lecture's position is that birds use magnetic fields only for long trips. He notes that this method cannot be used for short trips inside the cities.

Votes
Average: 7.8 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 198, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...utions can be applied to protect birds. The lecturer challenges the claims made by ...
^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, while, in contrast, to begin with

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1286.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 258.0 270.72406181 95% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98449612403 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00778971557 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.26962394175 2.5805825403 88% => OK
Unique words: 135.0 145.348785872 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.523255813953 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 367.2 419.366225166 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.5877930911 49.2860985944 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 80.375 110.228320801 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.125 21.698381199 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5625 7.06452816374 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => 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: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.200381410073 0.272083759551 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0658507667694 0.0996497079465 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0498710547497 0.0662205650399 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.114674723574 0.162205337803 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0525449861089 0.0443174109184 119% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.1 13.3589403974 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 72.16 53.8541721854 134% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 11.0289183223 65% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.92 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.7273730684 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => 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.