Integrated writing (TPO 48)
In the reading section, the writer claims that several methods have been proposed to solve the problem of declining frog populations including using less pesticides, using treatments for frogs, and better protection of their habitats; however, in the lecture, the professor casts doubt on the reading points by stating that none of these proposed methods are practical, and these proposals cannot be useful in recovering the number of frogs.
First of all, the writer contends that frogs are being harmed by pesticides, so we must pass some prohibiting laws in farming in order to reduce the using of pesticides. In contrast, the professor asserts that passing strict regulations on using pesticides is not a practical and economical approach. It may impose adverse effects on farming because by reducing the use of pesticides, farmers cannot yield enough crops from their lands. Moreover, farmers not using pesticides cannot compete with other farmers from the regions that use pesticides in farming and may fail.
Furthermore, contrary to the idea in the reading part suggesting that by using anti-fungal medication and treatments that kills the fungus we can protect sensitive frog populations from extinction, the lecturer mention that using this method is not a practical way, and it is also really expensive. Also, if we want to use medication on frogs, we must give it to each of them individually which is not a practical method. Additionally, because frogs cannot pass these treatments to their offspring, we must do this method on and on which is really expensive.
In addition, even though the writer states that by protecting frogs threatened habitats such as lakes and marshes from human activities we can recover the frogs' population, the professor mentions that human impacts on the frogs' habitats are not very severe. Many scientist believe that their habitats are threatened by bigger phenomena such as global warming. As a result, by not building structures near their habitats, we cannot recover frogs from extinction.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 150, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun pesticides is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...lining frog populations including using less pesticides, using treatments for frogs,...
^^^^
Line 4, column 156, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'frogs'' or 'frog's'?
Suggestion: frogs'; frog's
...rom human activities we can recover the frogs population, the professor mentions that...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 258, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun scientist seems to be countable; consider using: 'Many scientists'.
Suggestion: Many scientists
...the frogs habitats are not very severe. Many scientist believe that their habitats are threate...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 273, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'believes'.
Suggestion: believes
...ats are not very severe. Many scientist believe that their habitats are threatened by b...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, really, so, in addition, in contrast, such as, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 44.0 30.3222958057 145% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1715.0 1373.03311258 125% => OK
No of words: 326.0 270.72406181 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26073619632 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24917287072 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77359140629 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.506134969325 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 522.0 419.366225166 124% => 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: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 29.0 21.2450331126 137% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 101.058938699 49.2860985944 205% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 155.909090909 110.228320801 141% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.6363636364 21.698381199 137% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.4545454545 7.06452816374 162% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.41293856461 0.272083759551 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.159560407956 0.0996497079465 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0737729604775 0.0662205650399 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.254727513708 0.162205337803 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0478977457368 0.0443174109184 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.2 13.3589403974 136% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 53.8541721854 78% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.0289183223 132% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.82 12.2367328918 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.0 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 63.6247240618 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 28.5 10.7273730684 266% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.498013245 130% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.