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 the monologue by the professor present different aspects of turtle excluder device (TED) to protect the endangered sea turtle species. While the author of the article is skeptical about the use of TED and thus criticizes the use, the narrator doesn't vie with the reasons presented by the author. She feels that TED is successful to overcome all the limitations as addressed by passage.
To begin with, the author is not convinced about the idea to protect rarely trapped turtles by compromising a significant amount of shrimp through the passage in the nest. In contrast, the speaker argues that considering the broader context the gross amount is not negligible. To support her position, she further asserts that there runs 1000 of shrimp boats on the sea, so the cumulative sum of the hunted turtle species is also significant. Besides, among those rarely trapped turtles, there might be some species which are very limited in the sea and once they get caught, they would become extinct within a certain time.
Secondly, the author of the writing debates that shortening time limit should be a good replacement of the use of TED due to its' effectiveness. However, the professor doesn't find the alternative solution as a compelling one. Instead she finds the idea troublesome to the government as it is very difficult to check and enforce that every shrimp boat is actually following it. Meanwhile, TED is very easy to monitor as it is also needed to ensure that every boat starts the journey with the device and returns without turtle into it.
Last but not the least, the author further questions the efficiency of the TED device for the case of larger endangered sea turtles. He casts his doubts that larger sea turtles will not be able to get rid of the nets once get caught. Nonetheless, the speaker also resolves the issue by presenting the modification feature of the TED which is particularly issued to protect those larger species.
To conclude, the author tries to present some facts to prevent the use of TED. However, the speaker refutes all these claims with appropriate arguments and explanations.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 271, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...d thus criticizes the use, the narrator doesnt vie with the reasons presented by the a...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 168, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...s effectiveness. However, the professor doesnt find the alternative solution as a comp...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 226, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Instead,
...ternative solution as a compelling one. Instead she finds the idea troublesome to the g...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, besides, but, however, if, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, thus, while, in contrast, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 30.3222958057 165% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1793.0 1373.03311258 131% => OK
No of words: 361.0 270.72406181 133% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96675900277 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35889894354 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65229056142 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 145.348785872 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.523545706371 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 554.4 419.366225166 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.8909013928 49.2860985944 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.0625 110.228320801 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5625 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.3125 7.06452816374 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 4.33554083885 254% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.20852742985 0.272083759551 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0625654244367 0.0996497079465 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0604485116855 0.0662205650399 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.107280237914 0.162205337803 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0532881752084 0.0443174109184 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.31 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 63.6247240618 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.