TPO48
The listening and reading have a debate on approaches to solve the decline of frog populations. The passage proposed three possible methods, which is contradicted by the listening.
Initially, the author states that preventing the use of pesticides which are harmful to frogs helps to retain the frog populations. However, the speaker does not agree with this. According to her explanation, it is not economical and fair for farmers to prohibit the use of pesticides, for strict regulation leads to the loss of crop yield and thus loss competitive advantages over farmers in other areas.
In addition, the writer claims that antifungal treatments and medication that kill the fungus will bring positive effect. Nevertheless, the professor refutes the point by explaining that it is too expensive and complicated to do carry out the treatments. On the one hand, people should catch a large amount of frogs first and treat them individually. On the other hand, the ability to fight against fungus cannot be passed to new generations, so treatments should be carried again and again.
Last, regardless of the reading's opinion that frog species would recover by controlling excessive water use, the listening puts forward that excessive water use is not the major threat to frogs, but global warming. In accordance to her view, global warming results in the disappearance of water, which may give rise to the extinction of frog populations.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 25, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'readings'' or 'reading's'?
Suggestion: readings'; reading's
...n and again. Last, regardless of the readings opinion that frog species would recover...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, thus, in addition, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 22.412803532 54% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1214.0 1373.03311258 88% => OK
No of words: 232.0 270.72406181 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.23275862069 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.90276135726 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9054026308 2.5805825403 113% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.616379310345 0.540411800872 114% => OK
syllable_count: 367.2 419.366225166 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => 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: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 50.5933389925 49.2860985944 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.363636364 110.228320801 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0909090909 21.698381199 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.63636363636 7.06452816374 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.3659421053 0.272083759551 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.119019272441 0.0996497079465 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.106985285009 0.0662205650399 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.196899819122 0.162205337803 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0636776201048 0.0443174109184 144% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.