One of the threats to endangered sea turtle species is the use of nets by commercial shrimp-fishing boats. When turtles get accidentally caught in the nets, they cannot rise to the surface of the ocean to breathe, and they die. Some people suggest that this problem can be solved through an invention called a turtle excluder device (TED) that is incorporated into the nets. A TED provides a passage through which the turtles can escape. However, TEDs have been criticized for several reasons.
First, some shrimpers (shrimp fishers) argue that turtles get trapped only rarely: it is estimated that on average, one shrimp boat accidentally catches about one turtle every month. On the other hand, using TEDs costs the shrimpers some of their catch. Every time the shrimpers cast the nets, a certain percentage of shrimp manage to escape through the turtle passages. The shrimpers complain that the cost of losing shrimp on a daily basis is too high in comparison with the small chance of saving one turtle.
Second, there are alternative methods of protecting sea turtles that may be more effective than TEDs. One method that can be used is shortening the time limit that shrimp boats are allowed to keep their nets underwater. When the time limit is reached, the nets have to be pulled up to the surface, allowing any turtles caught in the net to get air and also giving shrimpers the opportunity to release the turtles from the nets.
Third, TEDs are not effective for larger species of endangered sea turtles. Some species like loggerhead and leatherback turtles can grow to be quite large and cannot fit through the escape passage that standard TEDs provide. Such turtles cannot escape from the nets even if the nets are equipped with TEDs.
Both the reading passage and lecture discuss whether using of turtle excluded device (TED) is effective or not. The former argues three disadvantages, but the latter refutes each of these points.
First of all, the author of the passage claims that the turtle is caught up once in a month by chance, and using the TED net causes a huge loss of the shrimpers as shrimp can get out of this. However, the lecture contends that in the USA, there are thousands of shrimp boats plying in the coastal areas, and if each boat is capturing one turtle, then it becomes a huge numbers. When the population size is very small, then a certain percentage of loss will become a great catastrophe.
Secondly, the text asserts that reducing the time limits of using nets, sea turtle populations can be kept safe, as shrimpers can get out of the turtle from the net In contrast, the listening claims that it is impossible to monitor the time limit of thousands of boats. The government's regulation system is not too good to these services and to check them in every time is quite arduous tasks.
In third, the reading passage states that some large species like loggerhead and leatherback might be caught while using TED net. On the other hand, the lecturer mentions that by modifying the design of the net, the problems can be solved. This revised version would function better to protect the sea turtle and other large species.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, third, while, in contrast, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1171.0 1373.03311258 85% => OK
No of words: 248.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.72177419355 5.08290768461 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96837696647 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.40341185143 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.58064516129 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 351.0 419.366225166 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.9655346558 49.2860985944 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.1 110.228320801 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8 21.698381199 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.1 7.06452816374 157% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.236754266227 0.272083759551 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0812462406432 0.0996497079465 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0605308114697 0.0662205650399 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129228809692 0.162205337803 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0482863414515 0.0443174109184 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 64.04 53.8541721854 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.39 12.2367328918 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.