The reading states that there are possible solutions to save frogs from declination in number and provides three reasons to support these suggestions. However, the lecturer explains that these methods are not practical enough to apply and refutes each of the author's reasons.
First of all, the reading suggests that one of the possible ways to protect frogs is to prevent the farmers from using the pesticides near frogs surroundings. However, the lecturer refutes that point by saying that farmers use these chemicals to fight bugs for their crops to grow better, otherwise Their crops would suffer, and they would be losing money.
Secondly, the reading claims that treat the frogs which have infected with fungus would be effective. However, the professor rejects this point by saying that this manner would be incredibly complicated and expensive. He clarifies that the treatment should be applied individually and more than once to different generation to work successfully. So this way is nearly impossible
Thirdly, the article claims that saving the water sources from destruction by human's activities would preserve frogs habitat. However, the professor says that the global warming is the core problem which reduces the frogs' homeland. He points out that reducing the human usage to water supplies would not solve the frogs' declination issue.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 217, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'frogs'' or 'frog's'?
Suggestion: frogs'; frog's
...g is the core problem which reduces the frogs homeland. He points out that reducing t...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 315, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'frogs'' or 'frog's'?
Suggestion: frogs'; frog's
...e to water supplies would not solve the frogs declination issue.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1143.0 1373.03311258 83% => OK
No of words: 214.0 270.72406181 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.34112149533 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82475343497 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53943050913 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 125.0 145.348785872 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.584112149533 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 331.2 419.366225166 79% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.4102023114 49.2860985944 60% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 114.3 110.228320801 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06452816374 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => 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: 0.380288514519 0.272083759551 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.149672627202 0.0996497079465 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100419551598 0.0662205650399 152% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.223709518372 0.162205337803 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0906595841302 0.0443174109184 205% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.18 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.