Astro

Essay topics:

Astro

The cane toad is a large (1.8 kg) amphibian species native to Central and South America. It was deliberately introduced to Australia in 1935 with the expectation that it would protect farmers' crops by eating harmful insects. Unfortunately, the toad multiplied rapidly, and a large cane toad population now threatens small native animals that are not pests. Several measures have been proposed to stop the spread of the cane toad in Australia.

One way to prevent the spread of the toad would be to build a national fence. A fence that blocks the advance of the toads will prevent them from moving into those parts of Australia that they have not yet colonized. This approach has been used before: a national fence was erected in the early part of the twentieth century to prevent the spread of rabbits, another animal species that was introduced in Australia from abroad and had a harmful impact on its native ecosystems.

Second, the toads could be captured and destroyed by volunteers. Cane toads can easily be caught in simple traps and can even be captured by hand. Young toads and cane toad eggs are even easier to gather and destroy, since they are restricted to the water. If the Australian government were to organize a campaign among Australian citizens to join forces to destroy the toads, the collective effort might stop the toad from spreading.

Third, researchers are developing a disease-causing virus to control the cane toad populations. This virus will be specially designed: although it will be able to infect a number of reptile and amphibian species, it will not harm most of the infected species; it will specifically harm only the cane toads. The virus will control the population of cane toads by preventing them from maturing and reproducing.

Votes
Average: 0.3 (1 vote)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2021-12-25 S M Naimul Mamun 3 view
2021-12-23 S M Naimul Mamun 3 view
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 356, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'destroying'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'force' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: destroying
...mong Australian citizens to join forces to destroy the toads, the collective effort might ...
^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, second, so, third

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.0286738351 45% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 43.0788530466 42% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 52.1666666667 79% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1478.0 1977.66487455 75% => OK
No of words: 297.0 407.700716846 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97643097643 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15134772569 4.48103885553 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.705390872 2.67179642975 101% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 212.727598566 73% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.521885521886 0.524837075471 99% => OK
syllable_count: 450.9 618.680645161 73% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 6.0 3.08781362007 194% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.94265232975 20% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.6003584229 68% => 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 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.2960986308 48.9658058833 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.571428571 100.406767564 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2142857143 20.6045352989 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.5 5.45110844103 28% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 11.8709677419 42% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.236089414692 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.076458572812 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0737576698707 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.150856017488 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0645574589148 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 11.7677419355 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 58.1214874552 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 10.9000537634 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.45 8.01818996416 105% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 86.8835125448 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
We are expecting: No. of Words: 350 while No. of Different Words: 200
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:

para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.

So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:

reasons == advantages or

reasons == disadvantages

for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.

or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.

It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.

Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.