Modern agriculture methods damage the environment but providing food for the growing population around the world is more important than protecting the environment

Essay topics:

Modern agriculture methods damage the environment, but providing food for the growing population around the world is more important than protecting the environment.

Modern agriculture methods damage the environment, but providing food for the growing population around the world is more important than protecting the environment.

Votes
Average: 8.8 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ood. I certainly disagree with this.   To begin with, despite the fact that the...
^^
Line 3, column 227, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...d every year. If the government and the general public really care about starving people, they...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 693, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ent are eradicated, the world would see less people starving.   Besides, the stat...
^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...orld would see less people starving.   Besides, the statement asserts that prov...
^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ay become unstable and inharmonious.   From the above discussion, I can draw th...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, if, may, really, so, as a matter of fact, in other words, to begin with

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 15.1003584229 139% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 9.8082437276 143% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 13.8261648746 130% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 43.0788530466 53% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 52.1666666667 82% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 8.0752688172 297% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2323.0 1977.66487455 117% => OK
No of words: 423.0 407.700716846 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49172576832 4.8611393121 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53508145475 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10234488951 2.67179642975 116% => OK
Unique words: 250.0 212.727598566 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.591016548463 0.524837075471 113% => OK
syllable_count: 720.9 618.680645161 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Article: 8.0 3.08781362007 259% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 10.0 3.51792114695 284% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.6003584229 131% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.1344086022 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.3177323538 48.9658058833 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.037037037 100.406767564 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.6666666667 20.6045352989 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.18518518519 5.45110844103 58% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.5376344086 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 17.0 3.85842293907 441% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.263545226361 0.236089414692 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0628385082782 0.076458572812 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0746473819985 0.0737576698707 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145372531907 0.150856017488 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0329175722308 0.0645574589148 51% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 11.7677419355 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.79 58.1214874552 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.27 10.9000537634 131% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.01818996416 105% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 86.8835125448 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.002688172 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.0537634409 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.247311828 78% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.

So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:

reasons == advantages or

reasons == disadvantages

for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.

or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.


Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.