Listening
The passage claims that there will be fewer and fewer birds, but the arguments used to support this claim are unconvincing.
First, it’s true that urban growth has been bad for some types of birds, but urban development actually provides better and larger habitats for other types, so much so that city and suburban dwellers often complain about increased birds populations,seagulls at landfills, pigeons on the streets and so on. Even birds like hawks and falcons can now be found in cities, where they prey on the increasing populations of pigeons and rodents. So it’s not going to be a story of uniform decline of bird populations in the future. Some populations may shrink, but others will grow.
As for agriculture, it’s true that it too will increase in the future, but not in the way assumed by the reading passage. The truth is, in the United States, less and less land is being used for agriculture every year. Increasing in agricultural production have resulted from and will continue to result from the introduction of new, more productive varieties of crops. These new crops produce more food per unit of land, and as a result, there’s no need to destroy wilderness areas.
And third, while it’s certainly true that traditional pesticides have been destructive to birds, it’s incorrect to project this history into the future. Now that people are aware of the possible consequences of traditional pesticides, two changes have occurred. First, new and much less toxic pesticides have been developed, and that’s important. Second, and perhaps more importantly there is a growing trend to develop more pest resistant crops, crops that are genetically designed to be unattractive to pests. Pest resistant crops greatly reduce the need for chemical pesticides. And best of all, pest resistant crops don’t harm birds at all.
the article states that wildlife, especially for birds, is endanger due to increase human population and resulted to growth in agriculture, and provides three reasons for supports. However, the professor explains that unbelieveably reasons presented in the article and refutes each of the authur's reasons.
first, the reading claims that the population of human are expanding and need more area for bulidings this by default leading to remove of natural habitat of birds and other animals. the professor opposes this point by explaining that growth population of human led to both better and larger habitat for birds. according to the professor, athough in some regions some habitats may be shrinking, in other regions new habitats will be increased.
second, the article posits that more population need more agricultural activities and this process give rasie destroying of birds' habitats. In contrast, the professor says that more land for living and develope agriculture activities introduce more crops, foods and better situation for living of the birds.
third, the reading says that pesticides and chemical poisons that use in the farming, can kill insects, and other birds' foods resources. the professor casts doubt on this point by saying that this reason may be partly true, but people become more aware of the negetive aspects of using the crops which produced by chemical fertilizers, and two new approachs will be undertaken; first, new crops will be produced through natural process that used lower level of pesticides and second, using the pest-resist crops instead of chemical pesticides and pests.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
the article states that wildlife, especiall...
^^^
Line 1, column 60, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'endangered'.
Suggestion: endangered
...that wildlife, especially for birds, is endanger due to increase human population and re...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: First
...es each of the authurs reasons. first, the reading claims that the population...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 184, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...ral habitat of birds and other animals. the professor opposes this point by explain...
^^^
Line 7, column 312, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: According
...th better and larger habitat for birds. according to the professor, athough in some regio...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Second
...new habitats will be increased. second, the article posits that more populatio...
^^^^^^
Line 19, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Third
...uation for living of the birds. third, the reading says that pesticides and c...
^^^^^
Line 19, column 138, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...sects, and other birds foods resources. the professor casts doubt on this point by ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, second, so, third, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 7.30242825607 205% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1385.0 1373.03311258 101% => OK
No of words: 254.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.45275590551 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99216450694 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63345512021 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 130.0 145.348785872 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.511811023622 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 411.3 419.366225166 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 86.7325960056 49.2860985944 176% => OK
Chars per sentence: 153.888888889 110.228320801 140% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.2222222222 21.698381199 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.66666666667 7.06452816374 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 4.19205298013 191% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.205975861711 0.272083759551 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0823732422561 0.0996497079465 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0508947363045 0.0662205650399 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116068958904 0.162205337803 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0357019892855 0.0443174109184 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.3 13.3589403974 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 53.8541721854 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.63 12.2367328918 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.19 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.