The reading passage makes three proposals, to cease the spread of the cane toad in Australia which destroys the work of farmers, including to build a fence, collect volunteers or develop a disease or virus. However, the lecturer cast doubts each idea of the author.
First and foremost, the article suggests that the fence will block the canes to access the parts of Australia that are toad-free. On the other hand, the professor denied that point by asserting that the young toads live in marine, so, even though where the fence would build, they could not obstruct the movement in the water. According to him, it is not an adequate way.
Secondly, the passage indicates that volunteers could hunt the young canes because they live in water and also easy to catch. Also, the government can create the campaign to collect them. In contrast, the lecturer clarified that inexperienced volunteers could hunt the frogs instead of young canes. He also argued that people may hurt the economic system by declining the population of the native frog.
Finally, the reading claims that people can control the population of cane toad by developing a virus or diseases. Nonetheless, the lecturer made a counterclaim to the idea by explaining that the virus can spread to America by transportation which may be harmful to the cane toads in America that are native in there. He also insisted that it may have terrible consequences for the population of canes all over the world.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, may, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, in contrast, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 10.4613686534 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1227.0 1373.03311258 89% => OK
No of words: 248.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.94758064516 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96837696647 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58132236578 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.540322580645 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 373.5 419.366225166 89% => 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: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.0777077082 49.2860985944 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.25 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6666666667 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.75 7.06452816374 124% => 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: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.367351511987 0.272083759551 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.118956936279 0.0996497079465 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101904057096 0.0662205650399 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210911714848 0.162205337803 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0872400771222 0.0443174109184 197% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.13 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 10.7273730684 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.