TPO 48 writing
When it comes to the declining of frog populations, the reading passage proposes three methods to solve this problem, which are contradicted by the following lecture.
First, the reading passage suggests that it will be useful to limit farmers using pesticides, since these chemicals can damage the frogs by attacking their nervous system. On the contrary, the lecture counters that this solutions not an economical practice or fair, because the farmers are closely relying on the pesticides to clear the pest in crops. Limiting the usage of pesticides can lead the farmer in disadvantage, and loose more crops.
Furthermore, the reading passage mentions that killing the certain fungus with heat and treating this infection both are possible solutions. The lecture, on the other hand, points that it is difficult to practice, because the frogs are infected individually, they have to be treated and recovered separately. So, the government have to do the same job in every spring, on each generation of frogs again and again. It will be too complicated and expensive.
Lastly, the reading passage argues that protecting the natural habitats, especially the water, will be useful too. But the lecture counters that it can't save the populations of frog. The reason is that global warming is the most important factor which leads to the reducing of water, and indirectly threaten the frogs by reducing the water where they lay eggs. So, protecting water couldn't help.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 216, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...the contrary, the lecture counters that this solutions not an economical practice o...
^^^^
Line 3, column 230, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...the lecture counters that this solutions not an economical practice or fair, beca...
^^
Line 7, column 149, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...l too. But the lecture counters that it cant save the populations of frog. The reaso...
^^^^
Line 7, column 383, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...ere they lay eggs. So, protecting water couldnt help.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, if, lastly, so, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1238.0 1373.03311258 90% => OK
No of words: 237.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.22362869198 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92362132708 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68760804748 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.586497890295 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 379.8 419.366225166 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.4311837961 49.2860985944 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.166666667 110.228320801 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.75 21.698381199 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 7.06452816374 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.348666498021 0.272083759551 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.116776317419 0.0996497079465 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0707710242079 0.0662205650399 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199440955939 0.162205337803 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0559930718503 0.0443174109184 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.78 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 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.