The passage discusses several proposals to stop spreading the excess cane toad, a large amphibian species, from Australia. The professor, on the other hand, believes that it is not as easy as the reading suggests, and she gives contrary reasons.
Firstly, the author suggests building a national fence which blocks moving uncolonized parts of Australia and points out it has been successfully done before. However, the professor disclaims the fence protection for spreading since the eggs of the cone toad lay near the river stream, in which flow promotes the spreading through.
Secondly, collaboration with volunteer locals to capture and destroy the amphibian is proposed in the passage. The professor, in contrary to the proposal, states that untrained volunteers are not capable of distinguishing the correct amphibian to destroy. As a result of this strategy, the population of other amphibian species, which are not harmful at all, would decrease.
Thirdly, the passage states that a disease-causing virus developed by might be a solution for controlling the spread, even though a few amphibian species are infected. On the other hand, the lecturer totally disagrees with this solution, and she claims the harm of the virus would be more severe than expected in the text. According to the lecturer, as scientists would collect and bring them to America, for example, and thus, the virus might be able to infect and spread other species among continents, indeed, it gives further harm to the whole ecosystem.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, thus, for example, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 22.412803532 49% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1284.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 242.0 270.72406181 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30578512397 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94415379849 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81313622148 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590909090909 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 380.7 419.366225166 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
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: 35.0793386483 49.2860985944 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.4 110.228320801 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2 21.698381199 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.2 7.06452816374 159% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
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: 0.326246636993 0.272083759551 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.115165207242 0.0996497079465 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0857033302578 0.0662205650399 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.172842411402 0.162205337803 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0493552810271 0.0443174109184 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 13.3589403974 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.2367328918 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.33 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.