According to the given set of the reading passage, it is the author's conviction that architectures are able to use some strategies in order to prevent the impact of wild birds to glasses of a building, which a huge number of these birds are harmed annually, owing to several highlighted solutions. On the contrary, the lecturer cast doubts on this justification and refutes each of the author's specific solution by providing several counter-arguments that are as follows:
First of all, the reading holds the view that, replacing the regular glasses by one-way glasses is one of the best approaches in this regard. However, the lecture finds this solution unconvincing by asserting that there is the main problem with this strategy. He mentions that these replaced glasses behave as a mirror and as a result, they will reflect the sky or trees that the wild birds won't understand and fly through them. Thus, it seems a bad approach.
Secondly, the author posits that by painting colorful lines and stripes on these glasses, the birds will be able to distinguish very easily and avoid from them. On the other hand, the lecturer rejects this point too. He explains that by applying this approach, not only the birds assume that as a hole and thus they will try to fly toward them, but also the inside of the buildings will be so dark for people.
As the last point to emphasize the reading claim, the author says that utilizing a magnetic field will be so helpful. Yet again, the lecture refutes this opinion too by saying that it is true that birds have the ability to use the magnetic field due to their natural sensitivity. But, this ability will be worked merely in the long distances. For instance, when they want to travel from a cold weather to a warmer one, they use it in order to navigate their routes. In other words, they will not be able to use this ability in short distances. In Addition, they usually use their eyes and brightness in traveling from a side of a city to another side of it.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 62, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...n set of the reading passage, it is the authors conviction that architectures are able ...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... buildings will be so dark for people. As the last point to emphasize the readi...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, thus, for instance, in addition, in short, as a result, first of all, in other words, it is true, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 22.412803532 192% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 49.0 30.3222958057 162% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1660.0 1373.03311258 121% => OK
No of words: 354.0 270.72406181 131% => OK
Chars per words: 4.68926553672 5.08290768461 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33761313653 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54038842828 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 145.348785872 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514124293785 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 508.5 419.366225166 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 81.1043985822 49.2860985944 165% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.571428571 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2857142857 21.698381199 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.2142857143 7.06452816374 187% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.359223508379 0.272083759551 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.110841421508 0.0996497079465 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0625374274316 0.0662205650399 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.208626849862 0.162205337803 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0426021542888 0.0443174109184 96% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 63.02 53.8541721854 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.22 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.13 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 27.0 10.7273730684 252% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.