Question : Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific solutions proposed in the reading passage.
The reading states that glass, which is widely used in buildings in the form of windows, can be absolutely dangerous for birds while they are flying and provides three ways to protect them from being injured. However, the professor challenges what the author mentions and feels that they all have serious problem which make them useless.
To begin with, the author claims that substituting the plain glass by on-way glass, birds could be kept safe since they would not see the other side of the glass and would not crash in to them. On the other hand, the lecturer casts doubt on this method by explaining the fact that on-way glass acts exactly like mirrors and all the things such as sky, tress and etc will be reflected. Thus, if birds just believes the reflected sky is the real sky, they will fly through them.
Secondly, the passage mentions that by painting the plain glass with colors, we could demonstrate a different glass to the birds which subsequently prevent them from going through it. Conversely, the speaker rejects this method and feels it would not be effective at all. According to his explanation, birds would definitely realize that the glass between two colorful lines are real holes and try to go through them. To solve this issue, one should make a modification and make the colorful lines as thick as possible which is also impossible since it would be too dark for the people inside the building.
Finally, the article present the idea of taking the advantage of artificial magnetic field in order to make the birds aware of the existence of this obstacle. This idea has also its own problems as the professors clearly illustrates it. To be more specific, even though it is generally accepted that birds can sense the magnetic field because of an intrinsic feature, the just use it when they are migrating from one country to another especially in long distances. As a result, they utilize other means such as their eyes and the brightness of sunlight to distinguish their way from going one part of as city to the other part. In this way, this method like the previous ones are not applicable at all.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, conversely, finally, however, if, second, secondly, so, thus, while, such as, as a result, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 22.412803532 165% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 51.0 30.3222958057 168% => 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: 1773.0 1373.03311258 129% => OK
No of words: 371.0 270.72406181 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.77897574124 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38877662729 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.38991920495 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 145.348785872 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.530997304582 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 522.9 419.366225166 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
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: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 21.2450331126 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 49.7793088726 49.2860985944 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.642857143 110.228320801 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.5 21.698381199 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.21428571429 7.06452816374 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0896796900853 0.272083759551 33% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0328792961398 0.0996497079465 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0348580569043 0.0662205650399 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0630424444367 0.162205337803 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0338759713352 0.0443174109184 76% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.3589403974 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 62.01 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.74 12.2367328918 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.82 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.498013245 118% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.