TPO-48
In the lecture, professor challenges all the methods explained in the passage about saving frog population from declining. She states all the methods offered in the readings are non-practical solusions and have a problem.
First, limiting use of pesticides which was proposed in the passage is not economically appropriate and not fair. In that case farmers who are close to the areas of endangoured frog would have sever disadvantages in comparison to the one far from that areas. They would lose their crop due to not using of chemical pesticides which would lead to lower yeild. Therefore, the first method stated in the reading is not fair.
Also, in the passage using antifungal was suggested to help the frog population. However, using antifungal needs to be done for every frog indivitually. In fact, frog should be captured and treated indivitually. Moreover, the treatment does not pass over the offsprings. So, the process should be done over and over again which make it complicated and time consuming as well as expensive. Therefore, the second method is not practical.
Lastly, the passage claimed that natural habitats are threatened by human activity due to excessive water use. In the lecture, speaker disagrees with the idea by saying that human activities in water use is not significant on frog habitats. In other words, she states that global warming is the big cause of changing habitats not human activities and water use. Therefore, limiting the human activities on water use could not save the frog population and is not working.
- Official 40 Task 1 Many scientists believe it would be possible to maintain a permanent human presence on Mars or the Moon On the other hand conditions on Venus are so extreme and inhospitable that maintaining a human presence there would be impossible 73
- TPO 44 80
- TPO 53 76
- tpo 30
- Venu Mars Moon Earth pressure space spacecraft other planets like Venus 15 kilometer 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, lastly, moreover, second, so, therefore, well, in fact, as well as, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 22.412803532 45% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1293.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 253.0 270.72406181 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.11067193676 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98822939669 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79616264188 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 133.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.525691699605 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 415.8 419.366225166 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.7217252267 49.2860985944 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 80.8125 110.228320801 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.8125 21.698381199 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.75 7.06452816374 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => 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: 0.198820131262 0.272083759551 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0697968506449 0.0996497079465 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0685252126214 0.0662205650399 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126714282025 0.162205337803 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0766103781799 0.0443174109184 173% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.06 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.