In this set of materials, the reading passage offers three methods in order to solve the problem of declining frog population. But in the eyes of the lecture, none of these solutions are practical and each of them have problems.
First of all, the author believes that pesticides which farmers used to prevent insects from damaging farm crops cause severe breathing problems for frogs, and suggests that farmers should not use these chemical substances. However, the speaker refutes this method and says if farmers don't use pesticides, they may lose more crops and can not compete with others in the market.
Moreover, the writer expresses fungus makes infection in frog and offers several ways to treat or prevent it by antifungal medication or killing the fungus with heat. In contrast, based on the lecture, this method is not practical because performing this solution for frogs individually in large scale are very difficult. Besides, this method needs to be performed for every generation of frogs separately, which is very complicated and expensive.
Also, based on the reading passage, human activities in natural habitats make lakes and marshes disappear and cause declining in frog population. Therefore, these water sources must protect from excessive water use and development. But, the speaker disagrees and says that the global warming makes lakes and marshes to disappear not human activities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 285, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...refutes this method and says if farmers dont use pesticides, they may lose more crop...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, therefore, in contrast, first of all
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: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 12.0772626932 41% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1188.0 1373.03311258 87% => OK
No of words: 224.0 270.72406181 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30357142857 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.86867284054 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61762508716 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 135.0 145.348785872 93% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.602678571429 0.540411800872 112% => OK
syllable_count: 369.0 419.366225166 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.6120198842 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.8 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4 21.698381199 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.5 7.06452816374 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.384621676576 0.272083759551 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.13785207565 0.0996497079465 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.066776897471 0.0662205650399 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.204887822555 0.162205337803 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0440431804574 0.0443174109184 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.3589403974 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.76 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.59 8.42419426049 114% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.