Some people claim that a nation's government should preserve its wilderness areas in their natural state. Others argue that these areas should be developed for potential economic gain.
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.
Admittantly, some people believe that nation’s wilderness areas shold be developed for potential economic gain, however, I bent more with the argument that nation’s government need to preserve its nature in their innate state. This is because there are several reasons that I want to introduce.
First, it is persuasive that the nation’s government should develope the area which is wild to gain economic profit. An examplar of power plant, hydro eletronic power plant is one of the efficient energy resources which afford people with many electro energy and water restorage. By developing hydro power plant, useless lake could be utilized as power resources and edible water resources, also. Therefore, wilderness area need to be developed to obtain economic gain.
On the other hand, I believe that it is more important for the government to protect their nature rather than developing it. For example, in South Korea, there was huge project that develope four main river in order to develope economy and improve landscape inside the city, Seoul. The project seemed successful at first glanced, but few years after the project turned out to be failure. The lakes began poluted and malorodoused, finally, it needs more money to be cleaned and demands more taxes from people in the city. It was the project that designed only to damage economic condition.
In summary, it is admittable that development of nature is essential for the good economic condition. However, I strongly believe that preserving nature is more important for the nation’s government to improve their society in economy due to the factors that I mentioned above.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 234, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to people'
Suggestion: to people
...efficient energy resources which afford people with many electro energy and water rest...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 398, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END[1]
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
...r resources and edible water resources, also. Therefore, wilderness area need to be...
^^^^
Line 3, column 414, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...edible water resources, also. Therefore, wilderness area need to be developed to ...
^^
Line 5, column 203, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'river' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'rivers'.
Suggestion: rivers
...as huge project that develope four main river in order to develope economy and improv...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, so, therefore, for example, in summary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.4196629213 32% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 14.8657303371 40% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 58.6224719101 53% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1400.0 2235.4752809 63% => OK
No of words: 264.0 442.535393258 60% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30303030303 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 4.55969084622 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74447437182 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 215.323595506 68% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.55303030303 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 459.0 704.065955056 65% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 20.2370786517 64% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.5863072551 60.3974514979 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.692307692 118.986275619 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3076923077 23.4991977007 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.15384615385 5.21951772744 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.407862678041 0.243740707755 167% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.140220539233 0.0831039109588 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.132833680166 0.0758088955206 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.247271552501 0.150359130593 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0855421106606 0.0667264976115 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 14.1392134831 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.46 12.1639044944 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 100.480337079 67% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.