hindering poaching activities and saving rhinos
Both the passage and the lecture are about ways to protect rhinoceros from extinction owing to the poaching activities. Actually, the author provides three solutions in order to hinder poaching activities and saving these animals. On the other hand, the professor is not convinced of this and casts doubts on the each of theories presented in the passage. Having categorically rejected the solutions, the professor accentuate the weakness of the solutions.
To begin with, the article and the lecture put forth to the idea of dehorning. In this vein, the writer argues that one way is to remove the horns by medical means in order to make them less appealing to hunters. This specific argument is challenged by the professor. According to the lecturer, this process is so tedious and requires a myriad of time and budget. Also, she asserts that even if there exists enough time and money, since the horns are vital and advantageous for the animal in order to find food and protection aims, this solution does not seem practical.
Secondly, the writer disputes that since the intensive demand for horns is based on fallacious believes about its benefits, public education regrading lack of scientific evidence for the benefits can works out. Contarstly, the professor opposes this notion by averting that although there is no proved evidence, however people holds such strong and ancient believes that cannot be changed through lack of scientific evidence.
Finally, the article asserts that the high price of the horns is due to the illegal trads and if government legalize the sales of the stored horn the prices will decrease and, though, the hunts will become less attractive. The professor's stance, in contrast, is that some people already do not buy the horn through illegal sales. Therefore, if it become legal the demand will rise and consequently, the price will increases and more animals will be hunt. Thus it has adverse effects.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 96, Rule ID: BELIEVE_BELIEF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'beliefs' (noun) instead of believes (verb)?
Suggestion: beliefs
...demand for horns is based on fallacious believes about its benefits, public education re...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 228, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
... hunts will become less attractive. The professors stance, in contrast, is that some peopl...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 348, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'becomes'?
Suggestion: becomes
...through illegal sales. Therefore, if it become legal the demand will rise and conseque...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 415, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'increase'
Suggestion: increase
...l rise and consequently, the price will increases and more animals will be hunt. Thus it ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 456, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ncreases and more animals will be hunt. Thus it has adverse effects.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, consequently, finally, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, in contrast, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1624.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 320.0 270.72406181 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.075 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22948505376 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58419928363 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 145.348785872 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.584375 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 501.3 419.366225166 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.6393384186 49.2860985944 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.266666667 110.228320801 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3333333333 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.06666666667 7.06452816374 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0750997799854 0.272083759551 28% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.029201660089 0.0996497079465 29% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0921483266823 0.0662205650399 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0539131523397 0.162205337803 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0933803190485 0.0443174109184 211% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.22 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 63.6247240618 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.