The reading passage states that sea turtle species are in the threat to become extinct and recently new devices has been invented to prevent turtle extinction. The passage, directly criticizes the new device by providing three specific supports. Nonetheless, the professor in the lecture believes that the arguments expresses by the article are not convincing and provides three reason to underscore her standpoint.
First of all, the passage mentions that shrimpers who earn money through shrimp fishing complain about this device which reduced their income. They argue that the number of turtles in the seas are less that what is supposed to be. Nonetheless, the professor in the lecture tries to convince them by illustrating that more than thousand shrimpers actively search for shrimps and as a result they would definitely catch some of them. Hence, in each year bunches of turtles got caught by the shrimpers.
Secondly, the reading asserts that it is better to shorten fishing time in order to help turtle population. However, the professor says that the idea may seem good but it only practical on theory. In this regard, the governments cannot control the myriad number of boats do fishery.
Third, the reading avers that there are other large turtle species that new devices lack the ability let them free and wrongly trap them; so this may not be an effective method to help these animal species. On the contrary, the professor shed the light on this issue by illustrating an amazing feature of new device. She points out that this device has the capability to manage the size of the turtle which is going to deal with. Consequently, TED can be design according to the size of turtles in each area.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 328, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a thousand'.
Suggestion: a thousand
...nce them by illustrating that more than thousand shrimpers actively search for shrimps a...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, hence, however, if, may, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, third, as a result, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1435.0 1373.03311258 105% => OK
No of words: 287.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11595363751 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5177537367 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 145.348785872 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.592334494774 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 432.0 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.4634681508 49.2860985944 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.5 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.64285714286 7.06452816374 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.72 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.