tpo 63 integrated
The reading and the lecture are both about the prevention of invasive cheatgrass. Whereas the author believes that the progress of cheatgrass should be controlled in north American fields in order to save other native grasses and lists out three ways to accomplish this goal, the lecturer claims that these methods do not work very well and refutes each of the suggestions as illustrated in the following essay.
First, the author claims that by letting grazing animals like cattle in fields eat cheatgrass, it will be possible to fight it and make some free space for other species to grow. However, the lecturer disputes this opinion. He mentions that grazing animals do not prefer to eat cheatgrass when there are other grasses available. They do not like the taste of cheatgrass and eat native ones first. In addition, he posits that the cattle just start to eat cheatgrass when there will be no more other grasses in place.
Second, the reading argues that using controlled fire to burn very flammable cheatgrass can help to eliminate them from the area. Nevertheless, the professor opposes this argument. he explains that burning by fire can just destroy parts of cheatgrass that are above the surface, while there are many seeds under the ground. Furthermore, he remarks that just after a few years the seeds will grow again and the grass start to invade again the whole area.
Third, the passage states that introducing a known fungal parasite, native of Asia and Europe, to cheatgrass can lead to a decrease in their reproduction rate. On the contrary, the speaker rejects this statement by saying that the cheatgrass and the mentioned parasite have lived with each other for many years. Therefore cheatgrass developed the ability to efficiently resist this fungal parasite and continue to reproduce. Moreover, he points out that this parasite can harm cheatgrass only when they are weak or ill. Therefore putting it into contact with cheatgrass has no noticeable results.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-03-06 | hamidbrz | 80 | view |
| 2021-12-12 | Ali Talaei | 63 | view |
- tpo 61 integrated task 76
- Movies and televisions have more negative effects than positive effects on the way young people behave 76
- Nowadays many high schools and universities require students to work on projects in groups and all members of the group receive the same grade mark on the project Do you agree or disagree that giving every member of a group the same grade is a good way to 90
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement When classmates or colleagues communicate about a project in person instead of by e mail they will produce better work for the project Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 90
- tpo 63 integrated 63
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 181, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: He
...s, the professor opposes this argument. he explains that burning by fire can just ...
^^
Line 4, column 312, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...e lived with each other for many years. Therefore cheatgrass developed the ability to eff...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 520, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...atgrass only when they are weak or ill. Therefore putting it into contact with cheatgrass...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, moreover, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, third, well, whereas, while, in addition, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1659.0 1373.03311258 121% => OK
No of words: 328.0 270.72406181 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05792682927 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25567506705 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55108244455 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.539634146341 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 500.4 419.366225166 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.1917544153 49.2860985944 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.6875 110.228320801 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.3125 7.06452816374 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.468102841096 0.272083759551 172% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.156566749504 0.0996497079465 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0678964327076 0.0662205650399 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.277418464444 0.162205337803 171% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0802701644587 0.0443174109184 181% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.3589403974 95% => 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: 12.07 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 10.7273730684 163% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 63.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.0 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.