In this set of materials, the reading passage explores the methods to slow down the declination of frog populations, and the professor's lecture deals with the same topic. However, she casts doubts on these ways. And in the lecture, she provides three specific points to substantiate her opinion.
To begin with, even though the reading passage suggests that government should regulate laws to prohibit the farmers from using harmful pesticides near sensitive frog habitats, the professor argues in the lecture that this is neither feasible nor economical. This is because if farmers are not allowed to use pesticides on their crops, they cannot compete with other cheaper crops which used pesticides. As a result, farms will not gain profits from their crops. Clearly, professor's argument refutes its counterpart in the reading.
Moreover, despite the statement in the reading that antifungal medicine could be used to cure fungus-infected frogs, the professor contends that capturing and applying medicine to every infected frogs are difficult and require huge efforts. She supports this point with the fact that the treatment will not pass down through genes to frogs' offspring; therefore, they still need extra efforts to catch frogs and apply medicines on them.
Finally, the author of the reading claims that human activities damage frogs' habitats via developing wetlands, whereas the professor asserts that it is global warming, rather than human activities, that compromise their habitats. Then she explains that this claim is indefensible by pointing out that water and wetlands are declining due to global warming; hence, not only frogs but also several species are disappearing.
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'finally', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'moreover', 'so', 'still', 'then', 'therefore', 'whereas', 'as a result', 'to begin with']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.238095238095 0.261695866417 91% => OK
Verbs: 0.170068027211 0.158904122519 107% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0714285714286 0.0723426182421 99% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0544217687075 0.0435111971325 125% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0442176870748 0.0277247811725 159% => OK
Prepositions: 0.12925170068 0.128828473217 100% => OK
Participles: 0.0374149659864 0.0370669169778 101% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.65768860246 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0340136054422 0.0208969081088 163% => OK
Particles: 0.0102040816327 0.00154638098197 660% => OK
Determiners: 0.0918367346939 0.128158765124 72% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0170068027211 0.0158828679856 107% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00340136054422 0.0114777025283 30% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1688.0 1645.83664459 103% => OK
No of words: 263.0 271.125827815 97% => OK
Chars per words: 6.41825095057 6.08160592843 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02706775958 4.04852973271 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.410646387833 0.374372842146 110% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.346007604563 0.287516216867 120% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.239543726236 0.187439937562 128% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.136882129278 0.113142543107 121% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65768860246 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.650190114068 0.539623497131 120% => OK
Word variations: 74.8760016361 53.8517498576 139% => OK
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0529801325 84% => OK
Sentence length: 23.9090909091 21.7502111507 110% => OK
Sentence length SD: 74.9412993423 49.3711431718 152% => OK
Chars per sentence: 153.454545455 132.220823453 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9090909091 21.7502111507 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.27272727273 0.878197800319 145% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.39072847682 0% => OK
Readability: 58.5098513654 50.5018328374 116% => OK
Elegance: 1.50632911392 1.90840788429 79% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.508218412643 0.549887131256 92% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.116429924359 0.142949733639 81% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.07264232455 0.0787303798458 92% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.58290208699 0.631733273073 92% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.200582687578 0.139662658121 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.19895343932 0.266732575781 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0961915054115 0.103435571967 93% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.299887033616 0.414875509568 72% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0110691718001 0.0530846634433 21% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.328818831904 0.40443939384 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.038034844968 0.0528353158467 72% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.26048565121 70% => OK
Positive topic words: 3.0 3.49668874172 86% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 3.62251655629 83% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 3.1766004415 94% => OK
Total topic words: 9.0 10.2958057395 87% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.