tpo20
Both the reading and lecturer are about a public practice which was submitted in late 1960s in the United State. It was called "let it burn". Whenever a fire was being occurred, it could burn itself quickly without any intervention. The reading provides an example of Yellowstone’s forest fire which was harmed with this approach. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article and she finds all of arguments dubious. She believes that forest fire is a natural phenomenon which does not have destructive consequences, but also it would provide positive conditions in a cycle.
First of all, the author of reading declares that huge section of trees and small plants chocked up and died up due to Yellowstone’s fire. This point is challenged by the professor. She points out that after a forest fire, new plants would be colonized and meanwhile plants have a chance for diversifying. Some small planets also start growing while formerly they did not have such a great opportunity. For example, when some tall trees or plants are killed by fire, there is not any shadow for blacking the growth of other small vegetation, thus they start burgeoning. Or some seeds which could have not already been opened, would be cracked.
Secondly, the article contends that this practice has negative effects on animals. The food chain and animals' habitats may be destroyed; conversely, the professor expresses that after burning, small places will be displayed in the forest floor and animals such as rabbit or mice can live in those mentioned places; consequently, these small animals are the main resource of food for large predators such as wolf or fox.
Finally, the reading passage states that if people rely on the aforementioned practice, burning will reduce the number of tourists and as a result, local business would be harmed in this way. This argument is rebutted by the lecturer. She poses that this phenomenon does not occur every year. The combination of low rain, strong wind cause fire to become massive; however it hardly occur. So after burning Yellowstone, next year visitors came back again.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 8, column 383, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'occurs'?
Suggestion: occurs
...re to become massive; however it hardly occur. So after burning Yellowstone, next yea...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, conversely, finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, thus, while, for example, such as, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1791.0 1373.03311258 130% => OK
No of words: 352.0 270.72406181 130% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08806818182 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33147354134 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73776243836 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 208.0 145.348785872 143% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590909090909 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 542.7 419.366225166 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 67.5413897931 49.2860985944 137% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.2631578947 110.228320801 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5263157895 21.698381199 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.05263157895 7.06452816374 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 4.45695364238 269% => 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: 0.2533389917 0.272083759551 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0717402267108 0.0996497079465 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0533188758249 0.0662205650399 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.141396491119 0.162205337803 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0501307631318 0.0443174109184 113% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 63.6247240618 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.