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

The reading passage and the lecture discuss solutions to prevent injuries from glass windows to birds. Despite that, the professor in the listening thinks none of the solutions in the reading is effective. He casts doubt on every single point the article makes and provides explanations to support his ideas.

To begin with, the reading passage suggests using one-way glass for windows so that birds can not see in to fly through. However, the lecturer argues that the surface of the one-way glass is like a mirror. Birds do not understand the mirror and when they see the sky in the reflection they would reckon it is the sky and try to fly through the glass window. As a result, the professor can not give a nod to the author in terms of the first point.

Secondly, about the colorful design, the writer indicates using some painted lines or designs to signal birds whereas the speaker holds the view that birds will still try to fly through the glass window when there is an opening hole. In addition, the room will become dark due to these designs. Apparently, the professor disproves the counterpart in the reading.

Over and above that, the author thinks the magnetic field can navigate birds' direction. The lecturer, on the other hand, explains that the birds' ability to sense magnetic fields is only used for long-distance trips such as migrating to a warm city during cold weather. The fact is that birds use their eyes and the brightness of the light for short-distance trips. Therefore, he can not support the solution of the artificial magnetic field.

To sum up, the writer and the lecturer have conflicting views on this topic. They will have difficulties finding common ground.

Votes
Average: 8 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 140, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'birds'' or 'bird's'?
Suggestion: birds'; bird's
...r, on the other hand, explains that the birds ability to sense magnetic fields is onl...
^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, whereas, in addition, such as, as a result, to begin with, to sum up, on the other hand

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

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 30.3222958057 132% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1414.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 291.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.85910652921 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13022058845 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47449883957 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553264604811 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 414.0 419.366225166 99% => 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: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.8965804146 49.2860985944 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.375 110.228320801 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1875 21.698381199 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.9375 7.06452816374 141% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => 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: 0.275432590721 0.272083759551 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0741139700903 0.0996497079465 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0877530916674 0.0662205650399 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129442195924 0.162205337803 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0906707320713 0.0443174109184 205% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 13.3589403974 79% => 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: 10.91 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.06 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.