Do you want to improve your writing? Try our new evaluation service and get detailed feedback.
Check Your Text it's free

The reading claims that the growth of human population, the agriculture growth and use of pesticide caused much harm to birds in the United States.

The reading claims that the growth of human population, the agriculture growth and use of pesticide caused much harm to birds in the United States. 9LBRX
The reading claims that the growth of human population, the agriculture growth and use of pesticide caused much harm to birds in the United States. These may result in decline of the number of birds in USA. The reading provides three arguments to support it claims. However, the lecture refutes the claim by saying that all arguments are unconvincing and opposes each argument mentions in the passage. First, the reading claims that as human population and settlements continue to expand, bird’s natural habitats will continue to disappear. However, the professor opposes it by stating that it is bad for some of the bird but it is really better other birds as they got larger habitat. The reports of sub-urban show that there are increase in number of birds like sea gulls, pigeons. Additionally, the hawks like big birds also increased in that area as, they depend on the pigeons and rodents. Therefore, the uniformity of birds will not decline, as some of species will grow and some of them will shrink. Second, the passage claims that agriculture activities also increases, which causes destruction of their natural habitats like forests. It is more likely to be continue in the future. However, the lecture opposes it by saying that the assumption made the reading is not true, as USA uses less and less land for agriculture. The new way of the agriculture is introduced, which increased the production of good in the same land. Therefore, USA will not destroy more land for the agriculture. Third, the author states that the use of pesticides will also increase, which will kill more birds or their reproduction rate will decrease. However, the professor refutes that by stating that the destruction of birds population were possible with use of the traditional pesticides. The new pest resistant crop, which is less likely to attract pest, and its pest resistance, so the need of the pesticides will decrease. Additionally, the new pesticides are developed, which are less toxic in nature. Therefore, birds will not affect with these kinds of pesticides. Thus, the reading and the lecture both contrast each other about the decline in bird population.
The
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
reading
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
claims
that the growth of human
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
population
, the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
agriculture
growth and
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
use
of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
pesticide
caused much harm to
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
birds
in the United States. These may result in decline of the number of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
birds
A determiner is probably missing here: "in the USA".
in USA
. The
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
reading
provides three arguments to support it
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
claims
.
However
, the lecture refutes the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
claim
by saying that all arguments are unconvincing and opposes each argument mentions in the passage.

First
, the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
reading
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
claims
that as human
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
population
and settlements continue to expand,
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
bird’s
natural habitats will continue to disappear.
However
, the professor opposes it by stating that it is
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
bad
for
If the text is a generality, 'of the' is not necessary. Did you mean "some"?
some of the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
bird
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
but
it is
The extreme adjective for good is "wonderful", "fantastic", "superb", "perfect", or "excellent".
really better
other
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
birds
as they
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
got
larger habitat. The reports of sub-urban
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
show
that there are increase in number of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
birds
like sea gulls, pigeons.
Additionally
, the hawks like
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
big
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
birds
also
increased in that area as, they depend on the pigeons and rodents.
Therefore
, the uniformity of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
birds
will not decline, as
After 'some of', you should use 'the' ("some of the species") or simply say "some species".
some of species
will grow and
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
some
of them will shrink.

Second, the passage
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
claims
that
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
agriculture
activities
also
increases, which causes destruction of their natural habitats like forests. It is more likely to be
Consider using a past participle here: "continued".
continue
in the future.
However
, the lecture opposes it by saying that the assumption made the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
reading
is not true, as USA
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
uses
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
less
and
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
less
land for
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
agriculture
. The new way of the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
agriculture
is introduced
, which increased the production of
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
good
in the same land.
Therefore
, USA will not
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
destroy
more land for the agriculture.

Third, the author states that the
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
use
of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
pesticides
will
also
increase, which will kill more
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
birds
or their reproduction rate will decrease.
However
, the professor refutes that by stating that the destruction of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
birds
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
population
were possible with
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
use
of the traditional
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
pesticides
. The new pest resistant crop, which is
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
less
likely to attract pest, and its pest resistance,
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
so
the need of the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
pesticides
will decrease.
Additionally
, the new
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
pesticides
are developed
, which are
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
less
toxic in nature.
Therefore
,
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
birds
will not
Did you mean "effect"?
affect
with these kinds of pesticides.

Thus
, the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
reading
and the lecture both contrast each other about the decline in
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
bird
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
population
.
What do you think?
  • This is funny writingFunny
  • I love this writingLove
  • This writing has blown my mindWow
  • It made me angryAngry
  • It made me sadSad

IELTS essay The reading claims that the growth of human population, the agriculture growth and use of pesticide caused much harm to birds in the United States.

Essay
  American English
5 paragraphs
358 words
5.5
Overall Band Score
Coherence and Cohesion: 5.5
  • Structure your answers in logical paragraphs
  • ?
    One main idea per paragraph
  • Include an introduction and conclusion
  • Support main points with an explanation and then an example
  • Use cohesive linking words accurately and appropriately
  • Vary your linking phrases using synonyms
Lexical Resource: 5.5
  • Try to vary your vocabulary using accurate synonyms
  • Use less common question specific words that accurately convey meaning
  • Check your work for spelling and word formation mistakes
Grammatical Range: 6.5
  • Use a variety of complex and simple sentences
  • Check your writing for errors
Task Achievement: 5.0
  • Answer all parts of the question
  • ?
    Present relevant ideas
  • Fully explain these ideas
  • Support ideas with relevant, specific examples
Labels Descriptions
  • ?
    Currently is not available
  • Meet the criteria
  • Doesn't meet the criteria
Recent posts





Get more results for topic:
  • The reading claims that the growth of human population, the agriculture growth and use of pesticide caused much harm to birds in the United States.