In the lecture, the professor argues against the three solutions in the reading passage because they are not practical.
First, it's true that reducing the pesticides might benefit the frogs, but such strict laws are not economically practical and not fair for the farmers that rely on pesticides to ensure the crops yield. If the farmers follow the rules and cease to use the pesticides, they will encounter crop loss, which is a severe advantage for the farmers. Therefore, prohibiting the farmers from using harmful pesticides is not practical.
Furthermore, there is several problems with the second solution to treat each infected frogs. On one hand, treating each individuals can be very difficult, because there are a huge amount of the infected frogs. On the other hand, there is no guarantee that the fungus would not pass from one frog to another, so the treating process has to be applied many times, which is too expensive to execute. So, the second solution to cure the infected frogs one by one is neither practical.
Last but not the least, the third solution argues to protect the water and wertland habitats so that the frogs can be secured. However, it is the global warming instead of the use of water that results into habitat loss. Along with the global warming, many water lands has been threatened and many species are extinct, so protecting the key water habitats from excessive water use will not server to slow down the global waring and thus can't ensure the safety of water habits and the species living in these locations. So, the third solution is also impractical because of the wrong cause-and-effect analysis.
In conclusion, according the analysis in the lecture, the three methods proposed by the reading passage are not practical to alleviate or prevent the decline of the frogs population.
- "Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain."Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the positi83
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. 75
- Do you agree or disagree: young people should try many different jobs before that deicide the long term career of their life.80
- Modern life is easier than life in the past90
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 14, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY
Message: Did you mean 'there are several problems'?
Suggestion: there are several problems
...cides is not practical. Furthermore, there is several problems with the second solution to treat each ...
Line 5, column 182, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'amounts'?
...ery difficult, because there are a huge amount of the infected frogs. On the other han...
Line 7, column 172, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
...ver, it is the global warming instead of the use of water that results into habit...
Line 7, column 439, Rule ID: CANT
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...to slow down the global waring and thus cant ensure the safety of water habits and t...
Line 9, column 166, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'frogs'' or 'frog's'?
Suggestion: frogs'; frog's
...alleviate or prevent the decline of the frogs population.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, second, so, therefore, third, thus, as to, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 22.412803532 45% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1531.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 306.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00326797386 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18244613648 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58089049959 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.516339869281 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 476.1 419.366225166 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.0587483589 49.2860985944 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.769230769 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5384615385 21.698381199 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.15384615385 7.06452816374 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => 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: 0.366175173154 0.272083759551 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113680490734 0.0996497079465 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0621045073189 0.0662205650399 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156973940501 0.162205337803 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0813702763692 0.0443174109184 184% => OK
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.3589403974 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 53.8541721854 89% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
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.