TPO 22
Both the reading and the lecture discuss whether ethanol fuel can be an alternative to gasoline or not. The reading implies that ethanol can not be an alternative to gasoline. However, the professor strongly disagrees with the reading. Accordingly, he presents three refutations.
First of all, the reading passage mentions that the increased use of ethanol fuel would not help solve global warming caused by gasoline use. Yet, the lecturer severely contradicts this theory by contending that ethanol fuel will not add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Actually, growing the corn, the material of ethanol fuel, will absorb carbon dioxide. As a result, the first theory is not convincing at all.
Secondly, the passage indicates that the production of significant amounts of ethanol would dramatically reduce the amount of plants available for uses other fuel. Nonetheless, the speaker seriously challenges this statement by arguing that ethanol fuel will not reduce the food of animals. Also, ethanol fuel can be made by certain part of the plant that animals do not eat it. Hence, the production of ethanol will not reduce the amount of plants available for uses other fuel.
Last but not least, the reading suggests that ethanol will never be able to compete with gasoline on price. Once again, the scholar opposes this hypothesis because the price of the ethanol will drop if the productivity increases. Furthermore, if more than three times of people use ethanol in the future, the price of ethanol will drop by forty percent. In other words, ethanol will be able to compete with gasoline on price in the future.
In conclusion, the professor argues each theory in the reading. That is to say, he maintains that ethanol fuel can be an alternative to gasoline.
- T P O 53 3
- TPO21 Integrated writing 80
- TPO42 75
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Sometimes people think nowadays the media TV newspaper Internet are less concerned about the accuracy of news than in the past and the incorrect information may cause more problem to the public 87
- school used to offer three after-class activities.1)sports 2)art 3)volunteeringļ¼but this year, school's extra money may only can offer one activity. Which one do you choose and why? 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, actually, also, but, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, in conclusion, as a result, first of all, in other words, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 5.04856512141 277% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1488.0 1373.03311258 108% => OK
No of words: 290.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13103448276 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63440151527 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 141.0 145.348785872 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.486206896552 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 468.0 419.366225166 112% => 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: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.7569862052 49.2860985944 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.6666666667 110.228320801 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.1111111111 21.698381199 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0555555556 7.06452816374 142% => 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 : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.512817104184 0.272083759551 188% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.179005105827 0.0996497079465 180% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.109351295142 0.0662205650399 165% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.284150967482 0.162205337803 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0979808929634 0.0443174109184 221% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.8 13.3589403974 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.