The author describes that the number of the birds in the United States will necessarily decline and brings up three reasons to support this claim. On the other hand, the professor asserts that the fewer birds have been declined and the article does not provide convincing evidence and refutes each of the author's points with rational reasons.
First, the writer states that expanding human population and settlements lead to the reduction of the bird population. Nevertheless, the lecturer points that although urban growth provides an unsuitable situation for some birds, the better and larger habitats are now have been provided for the other types. To be more specific, numerous people complain about the increasing number of some kinds of birds, such as seagulls, pigeons, hawk, which preys on the increasing number of pigeons, and so forth. In other words, the number of bird population does not uniformly decline, some of them shrink and the others grow.
Second, according to reading, agricultural activities cause declination in the bird population. Conversely, the professor brings up the idea that nowadays the agricultural products have increased, but not because of the reason asserted in the passage. In fact, in these days, less and less land is used for agricultural goals. Since more productive crops are used which they produce more food per unit of land, there is no need to destroy wilderness areas.
Third, the increasing use of chemical pesticides noticeably has contributed to declining in the bird population. However, the professor posits that this claim is incorrect. As a matter of fact, people are aware of the possible consequences of the chemical pesticides and two important changes have happened. Firstly, the new and much less toxic pesticides have been developed. Secondly, there is a heated trend among people to use pest-resistant crops. In other words, these crops are unattractive to the pests which result in the reduction in the need for chemical pesticides. Consequently, using these new pesticides does not harm the birds. The second change is even more important than the first one.
Therefore, the points mentioned in the reading do not make any sense.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, conversely, first, firstly, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, in fact, such as, as a matter of fact, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1847.0 1373.03311258 135% => OK
No of words: 353.0 270.72406181 130% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23229461756 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33454660006 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74738467042 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 145.348785872 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.541076487252 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 565.2 419.366225166 135% => 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: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 2.5761589404 311% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.5388187 49.2860985944 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.2105263158 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5789473684 21.698381199 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.78947368421 7.06452816374 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.366025809191 0.272083759551 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.102916534949 0.0996497079465 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.075120119817 0.0662205650399 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16222411599 0.162205337803 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0781248795298 0.0443174109184 176% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 63.6247240618 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.