TPO 21 - Genetically modified trees
Both the reading and the lecture discuss the outcomes of genetically modified trees. The reading passage provides us with three possible benefits of planting genetically modified trees. However, the professor strongly disagrees with the passage. According to his lecture, he presents three following refutations.
First of all, the reading tells that genetically modified trees are easier to survive than normal trees because these special trees are much harder than natural trees. However, the lecturer severely rejects this claim by arguing that modified trees, in fact, are more vulnerable than normal trees. To be more specific, because all the modified trees have the same genes, no one of these trees can survive if one pest does harm to anyone of genetically modified trees, but a few of normal trees do survive due to the diversity of their genes. As a result, the reading passage lacks a piece of convincing evidence to rationalize his argument.
Secondly, the author of this reading passage supports that growing these genetically modified trees can bring a lot of economic benefits to these farmers. On the contrary, the speaker firmly refutes this argument by analyzing seriously the cost of planting these unnatural trees. In detail, it is much expensive for these genetically modified seeds than normal seeds. Moreover, these company inventing genetically modified trees disallows farmers to collect and re-plant these seeds. Therefore, planting these genetically modified trees actually did not bring positive economic outcomes to farmers.
Last but not least, the reading indicates that planting modified trees prevents the overexploitation of wild trees. In contrast, the scholar firmly challenges this argument by telling that these modified trees endanger the survival of normal trees. In other words, genetically modified trees compete with normal trees for resources such as water and land. Furthermore, because these modified trees grow aggressively than normal trees, they will crowd out normal trees in the end. Apparently, growing modified trees do harm to nature.
In conclusion, the speaker provides three pieces of solid evidence and refutes strongly all the argument proposed by the author of the reading that growing genetically modified trees can bring benefits to our environment and people.
- Ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline. 85
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 50
- If a goal is worthy, then any means taken to attain it is justifiable. 50
- You have enough money to purchase either a house or a business. Which would you choose to buy? Give specific reasons to explain your choice. 70
- As we acquire more knowledge, things do not become more comprehensible, but more complex and mysterious. 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 380, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this company' or 'these companies'?
Suggestion: this company; these companies
...fied seeds than normal seeds. Moreover, these company inventing genetically modified trees di...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, apparently, but, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, in conclusion, in contrast, in fact, such as, as a result, first of all, in other words, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1981.0 1373.03311258 144% => OK
No of words: 357.0 270.72406181 132% => OK
Chars per words: 5.54901960784 5.08290768461 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34677393335 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65222769835 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.456582633053 0.540411800872 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 608.4 419.366225166 145% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 2.5761589404 311% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
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: 49.173050746 49.2860985944 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.263157895 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7894736842 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.8947368421 7.06452816374 154% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
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: 0.46094947334 0.272083759551 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.181964987628 0.0996497079465 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101781032101 0.0662205650399 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.288611269327 0.162205337803 178% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0942421567429 0.0443174109184 213% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 53.8541721854 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.91 12.2367328918 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.16 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 63.6247240618 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => 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: 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.