TPO 48
In this set of materials, the reading passage states that frogs population have declined in around the world, and frogs play a role in protecting humans by eating disease-carrying insects, so the reading provides 3 theories for protecting frogs. On the other hand, the listening section brings into question the reading points by providing different reasons (and examples).
First, the reading passage indicates that farmers use pesticides for protecting their harvest from insects, but these pesticides spread from farmland to the frog habitats and injured them, so some lows for prohibiting the use of pesticides can help population frog. In contrast, the lecturer opposes this view by mentioning that reducing the use of pesticides is not fair and not economically solution. When farmers do not use pesticides, their crops will be decreased. Also, they cannot stay in markets because they do not have enough harvest. In this situation, if farmers want to use pesticides, they must follow strict rules, and it is not practical. So it has several disadvantages points.
Furthermore, the reading argues that a fungus that spread all word can kill frogs, so by treating frogs, their population will be protected; conversely, what the lecturer believes is different. She points out that this solution has a couple of problems. First, people must treat frog individually. They must capture them and then treat them. The second is that treating parents does not mean their offspring are protected. This treatment must be repeated for offspring again. It means that treatment should be repeated for each generation. Indeed, it is a complex and expensive solution.
Finally, according to the reading, humans cause disappear some water land and water, so people must protect this place and do not use them. However, the professor believes that water use and development are not main treated to water and water habitats, but global warming cause vanishes many water and water land. Prohibiting humans from using water or building near frog habitats is unlikely to prevent the ongoing habitat changes caused by global warming.
- TPO 41 70
- TPO 49 - Integrated writing 73
- Which one do you prefer Why a company offering you a job with challenging and interesting projects but less vacation days or another company offering you a job that is not so challenging and interesting but has more vacation days 80
- TPO-48 - Integrated Writing Task 81
- Workers are more satisfied when they have many different types of tasks to do during the workday than when they do similar tasks all day long 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 27, column 288, Rule ID: MANY_FEW_UNCOUNTABLE[2]
Message: Use 'much' or 'little' with uncountable nouns.
Suggestion: much; little
...tats, but global warming cause vanishes many water and water land. Prohibiting human...
^^^^
Line 27, column 288, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[2]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun water seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much water', 'a good deal of water'.
Suggestion: much water; a good deal of water
...tats, but global warming cause vanishes many water and water land. Prohibiting humans from...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, second, so, then, in contrast, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 15.0 7.30242825607 205% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.01324503311 259% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1814.0 1373.03311258 132% => OK
No of words: 338.0 270.72406181 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.36686390533 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28774723029 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.719437083 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 145.348785872 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.53550295858 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 526.5 419.366225166 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 67.3690378261 49.2860985944 137% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.4736842105 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7894736842 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.94736842105 7.06452816374 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 4.33554083885 231% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.420154101934 0.272083759551 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.105889132474 0.0996497079465 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.108980198811 0.0662205650399 165% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.241452976644 0.162205337803 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0710664668027 0.0443174109184 160% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.57 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 63.6247240618 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 10.7273730684 182% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.