TPO 20
In this set of materials, the reading passage states that the "let it burn" says forest fire would burn themselves out quickly, without causing much damage, but the Yellowstone park started to burn in 1988 and brings several disadvantageous points. On the other hand, the listening section brings into question the reading by providing different reasons (and examples).
First and foremost, the reading passage indicates that Yellowstone fire makes huge damages to park's trees and vegetables, and most of them were destroyed; in contrast, the lecturer opposes this view by mentioning that after a fire, Yellowstone park became new colonize for new plants and vegetables. She explains that most of the small plants that need open space and lived in the shade of tall trees found new opportunities for growth. Also, some seeds need high temperature for cranking and starting to grow; thus, these plants started to grows. And, after a fire, plants diversity become large.
Furthermore, the reading argues that Yellowstone wildlife affected as well as vegetables, and most large animals were fleeing from parks; conversely, what the lecturer believes is different. She points out that after burning, new opportunities were created for animals. Small animals such as rabbits and herbs found new habitat in burned trunk tress. Small animals were good food for large animals, so predators come back to Yellowstone for finding food. Indeed, wildlife came back to previous situations.
Finally, according to reading, The Yellow stone fire has bad effects on the local economy by destroyed a park, if it happens every year. However, the professor believes that this fire needs unusual situations such as low rainfall and strong wind. After 1988, we have not been seeing the fire as the same as the Yellowstone fire. After 1988, the Yellowstone parks come back to previous situations after 1 year.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-25 | Apolytos | 70 | view |
| 2022-01-18 | lutzuming | 80 | view |
| 2021-12-28 | Pooja dave | 80 | view |
| 2021-12-28 | Pooja dave | 80 | view |
| 2021-05-16 | mahi22 | 80 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 542, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'grow'.
Suggestion: grow
... to grow; thus, these plants started to grows. And, after a fire, plants diversity be...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, so, thus, well, in contrast, such as, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1628.0 1373.03311258 119% => OK
No of words: 303.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37293729373 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17215713816 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63758527476 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 145.348785872 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.580858085809 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 468.0 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 2.5761589404 311% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.7814365637 49.2860985944 142% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.533333333 110.228320801 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2 21.698381199 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.8 7.06452816374 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.338353350432 0.272083759551 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.102499533555 0.0996497079465 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0741136062432 0.0662205650399 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.19627051583 0.162205337803 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0157314115575 0.0443174109184 35% => 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: 14.0 13.3589403974 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.2367328918 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 10.7273730684 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.