TPO17 Integrated Writing
In the reading passage, the author states that growth of human population, the agriculture and pesticide use are harmful to the wildlife in the United States, particularly birds. On the contrary, the professor strongly contradicts with it.
To start with, the passage mentions that some wetlands and forests are cultivated by human so that the traditional land for suitable for birds decreases. However, the professor claims that the reading passage fails in taking account that human urban lifestyle brings the better living condition and larger land for the birds to live. To further illustrate her point, she cites research that some particular spices of birds, like nightingale, their populations increases after the human.cultivation. And she says though some lands for birds living shrinks, other places grows. So this is the first divergence between the reading and listening material.
Furthermaore, the reading passage indicates that agricultural activities result in the destruction of birds' habitats as more areas are converted to agricultural use. By contrast, the professor disagrees with it and reasons that as more productive crops and wheats invented, the yields of crops increases without occupy more lands for brids to live. And there is no need to cultivate more land for agricultral use any more. So this is the second point that the reading passage contradicts with the lecture.
Last, the passage says that the use of chemical pesticides are poisons to kill insects and pest, which are food for birds. And these pesticides get into food chain and harm birds too. But the professor points that as the technique advances, new pesticide are less toxic than before. And there is a trend that as the more and more birds eat the food that has pesticide in it, they are more pesticide-resident that chemical pesticide are not as harmful and toxic as the passage mentions). So this is the third point that the reading passage are not harmonious with the listening.
In conclusion, based on the arguments raised above, the professor identifies the defects in the reading passage and forcefully shows that the human lifestyle dosen't do harm to the birds populations at all.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-12-29 | Jesse Liu | 73 | view |
| 2016-04-06 | younes.tatari | 80 | view |
| 2015-11-06 | Samar 1984 | 70 | view |
| 2015-09-29 | ece-16 | 70 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, so, third, in conclusion, on the contrary, to start with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 7.30242825607 219% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1843.0 1373.03311258 134% => OK
No of words: 354.0 270.72406181 131% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20621468927 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33761313653 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79821474256 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 145.348785872 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.488700564972 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 563.4 419.366225166 134% => 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: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.51434878587 330% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.4413025929 49.2860985944 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.411764706 110.228320801 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8235294118 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.23529411765 7.06452816374 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => 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: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.356647782311 0.272083759551 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123985793579 0.0996497079465 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0878565137715 0.0662205650399 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.201437328188 0.162205337803 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0524695885098 0.0443174109184 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 13.3589403974 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 63.6247240618 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.