The lecturer casts doubt on the three methods provided by the reading passage to protect the declining frog species. She states that none of them is practical, even though they are seemingly acceptable. She points out that problems exist in each of the methods in reading passage.
The problem of the first method is that it is not economically to prohibit the use of pesticides in sensitive areas. According to the lecturer, farmers rely on pesticides to prevent insects from their corps to obtain a remarkable harvest. If farmers in the sensitive areas are prohibited to use pesticides, there will be a severe disadvantage for them compared to the farmers in other areas. Thus, they will lose the competing between themselves and other farmers, which is a damage to their life.
In addition, the flaw of the second method is that it is difficult to apply the treatments to frogs on a large scale, which is a contradiction to the reading passage. The lecturer emphasizes that the treating method should be applied on each frog to prevent infection from the fungus. As a result, researchers are supposed to apply the treatments again and again to each new generation of frogs, which is absolutely impossible.
Moreover, the lecturer mentions that, although it is beneficial for the environment to protect water habits, it will still not save frogs. She contends that the excessive water use by human acctivities is not the biggest problem to frog species, while global warming is indeed the most harmful problem to frogs. We are supposed to focus more on solving global warming rather than only protecting water habitats for frogs, because it is unlikely to prevent the declining of frog species by only protecting water habitis, which implies that the third method presented in the reading passage suffers from some flaws.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 475, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[1]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'damage'.
Suggestion: damage
... themselves and other farmers, which is a damage to their life. In addition, the flaw...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, moreover, second, so, still, third, thus, while, in addition, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 30.3222958057 152% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1529.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 304.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02960526316 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17559525986 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69073116331 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 145.348785872 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496710526316 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 471.6 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 1.25165562914 479% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.0817920994 49.2860985944 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.615384615 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3846153846 21.698381199 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.46153846154 7.06452816374 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.367828559607 0.272083759551 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117750271773 0.0996497079465 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0743828980418 0.0662205650399 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.194631833712 0.162205337803 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0648071784556 0.0443174109184 146% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.3589403974 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 53.8541721854 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 63.6247240618 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.