The article states that businesses can use several solutions to prevent birds injuries and provides three reasons of support. Conversely, the professor states that none of these solutions are effective to stop birds injuries and he refutes each of the author’s reasons.
First, the reading avers that replace the regular, clear class windows with one- way glass that transparent in only one direction will help birds to as barriers, so they will not get injuried. The professor opposes this idea by saying that one-way glass are reflected as mirrors, so they are bad as regular ones. Since birds do not understand reflection of mirrors, therefore, they will see the reflection of the sky, or trees. And thus, they got injuried too, because, they see as real trees, or the sky.
Second, the article claims that painting colorful lines or other designs on regular class windows, birds would avoid flying through the glass. The professor, on the other hand, explains that openinngs between lines or strips would perceive birds as open holes. Since birds understand these opennings as holes, they want to fly through them. If we want to prevent birds to fly thorough openinngs, we should do them extremely small ones, which would make rooms so dark from inside.
Third, the reading posits that create an articial magentic fields held to guide birds away from buildings. However, the professo disagrees with this point by stating the magentic field will not be effective. He adds that its true that birds use magentic to field to navigate, but for long distances travelling. For instance, when birds migrate from cold to warm areas, they will use magentic fields to direct them. On ther hand, short distance travels., such as flying from building to another, they will use their eye, and brightness of light to naviagte. And thus, using magentic field will not be much useful.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 12, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s real trees, or the sky. Second, the article claims that painting colorful li...
^^
Line 5, column 370, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hrough them. If we want to prevent birds to fly thorough openinngs, we should do ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, first, however, if, second, so, therefore, third, thus, for instance, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1574.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 312.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04487179487 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.38987392348 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.570512820513 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 448.2 419.366225166 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 1.0 0.116997792494 855% => Less interrogative sentences wanted.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 6.0 1.51434878587 396% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.7303088545 49.2860985944 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.375 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0625 7.06452816374 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 4.33554083885 231% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.451107904853 0.272083759551 166% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.143788912928 0.0996497079465 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0757936828501 0.0662205650399 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.236967052384 0.162205337803 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0615252527147 0.0443174109184 139% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 53.8541721854 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 11.0289183223 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.17 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.