In this set of material, the passage and the lecture offer two opposing points of view about the collision of birds with buildings which have glasses. While the passage states there are solutions to this issue and provides three examples, the lecture rejects them and considers them as inefficient solutions.
First, the passage suggests that by using one-way glasses we can prevent these accidents owing to the fact that birds cannot see inside of the building. In addition, people in the building are able to see outside. On the other hand, the lecture refutes this remark by pointing out that one-way glasses act as a mirror from the outside and mirrors are as dangerous as glasses to the birds because they are not able to distinguish mirrors. In fact, they think there is an environment in the mirror.
Second, the passage asserts that using designed or painted glasses can be the solution and in order to provide light and view, there are opening in the design through which people are able to see outside. In contrast, the speaker throws down this notion and argues that the wholes are still a danger to the birds due to the point that they are willing to cross the wholes. He also states that in order to prevent the accidents, the whole should be too small hence, there would be no enough light in the buildings.
Finally, the author declares that using an artificial magnetic field can be occupied as a solution. In contradict, the speaker denies to take this solution as a good one and illustrates that birds only use magnetic field as a guide in long-distance migrations. In short-trip they exploit their eyes and brightness of the light in order to navigate the way, therefore this solution cannot be utilized to hinder the birds from colliding with high buildings.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 127, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'denies taking'.
Suggestion: denies taking
... a solution. In contradict, the speaker denies to take this solution as a good one and illustr...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, hence, if, second, so, still, therefore, while, in addition, in contrast, in fact, in short, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 30.3222958057 155% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1475.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 307.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 4.80456026059 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18585898806 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45998005535 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 145.348785872 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511400651466 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 450.0 419.366225166 107% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.8163293175 49.2860985944 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.916666667 110.228320801 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5833333333 21.698381199 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.0 7.06452816374 156% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.427331650725 0.272083759551 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.142512641771 0.0996497079465 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0826508284074 0.0662205650399 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.236729161386 0.162205337803 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0941070558876 0.0443174109184 212% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.3589403974 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.86 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.22 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.