The main idea of both the passage and the lecture are how can avoid spreading of cane toads across Australia? In this line of thought, the reading states three solutions about preventing prevalent of cane toads. The lecturer, on the other hand, casts doubt on all the three episodes of arguments mentioned in the passage, believing that none of these strategies are practical and lead to the real world. In the rest of the passage, a comparison between them is provided.
First of all, the reading and the listening materials talk about building a national fence. Fence means the blocks which placed the front of the toads and avoid them from moving into those parts of Australia that the toads have yet depopulated. However, The lecturer believes this solution can sum up a few amounts of cane toads because young toads and toad eggs find in rivers and streams. No matter where the fence is located, at some point there are rivers or streams flowing from one side to the other.
Second, both the text and the talk discuss the toads can capture and destroy by volunteers. The author points out that cane toads can easily be caught in simple traps and can even capture by hand. Young toads and cane toad eggs are even easier to gather and destroy since they restrict to the water. Therefore, the author elaborates that if the Australian government organizes a campaign among Australian citizens to join forces to destroy the toads, the collective effort might stop the toad from spreading. However, the lecturer notes that these untrained volunteers would inadvertently destroy many of Australia's native frogs. Some of which endanger. Therefore, telling the cane toad apart from native frogs are a dilemma especially when the cane toads are young.
Eventually, a disease-causing virus which discussed by both the passage and the lecture. The author mentions that although the disease-causing virus has the influence on infecting a number of reptile and amphibian species, it doesn’t harm most of the infected species and specifically harms only the cane toads. The lecturer rebuts this argument. She states that Australian reptiles and amphibians often transport to other continents by researchers or pet collectors for example. Thus, once the animals infected by the virus reach Central and South America, the virus attacks the native cane toads and devastate their populations. That would be an ecological disaster because in the America cane toads are a native species and a vital part of the ecosystem.
Sum up, although the passage provides some solutions to preventing from spreading out cane toads population, the lecture opposes the effectiveness and possibility of those reasons.
- TPO-31- Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Because the world is changing so quickly, people now are less happy or less satisfied with their lives than people were in the pastUse specific reasons and examples to 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Television advertising directed towards young children (aged two to five) should not be allowed. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.73
- It’s difficult for teachers to be both popular (well liked) and effective in helping students learn. Agree or disagree?73
- TPO-15 - Integrated Writing Task The cane toad is a large (1.8 kg) amphibian species native to Central and South America. It was deliberately introduced to Australia in 1935 with the expectation that it would protect farmers' crops by eating harmful insec60
- TPO-14 - Integrated Writing Task Every year, forest fires and severe stormscause a great deal of damage to forests in the northwestern United States. One way of dealing with the aftermath of these disasters is called salvage logging, which is the practice81
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 430, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO
Message: Did you mean 'destroying'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'force' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
...mong Australian citizens to join forces to destroy the toads, the collective effort might ...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, so, therefore, thus, apart from, for example, 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: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 7.30242825607 301% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 30.3222958057 185% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2266.0 1373.03311258 165% => OK
No of words: 441.0 270.72406181 163% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13832199546 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58257569496 4.04702891845 113% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66105159521 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 145.348785872 156% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514739229025 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 692.1 419.366225166 165% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.23620309051 182% => 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: 22.0 13.0662251656 168% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.5928255608 49.2860985944 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.0 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0454545455 21.698381199 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 7.06452816374 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 4.45695364238 292% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.585689457267 0.272083759551 215% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.161309064795 0.0996497079465 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.123477040308 0.0662205650399 186% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.309118178025 0.162205337803 191% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.122792201632 0.0443174109184 277% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.32 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 63.6247240618 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.