The author states the methods of protecting the forest trees oaks from the spread of dangerous P. ramorum fungus. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter - argues that viewpoint trying to prove these three methods do not seem convincing.
First and foremost, the writer mentions that P. ramorum spores should be stopped spreading from hikers or bicycle trails, suggesting that these small spores can be eliminate by encourage hikers to wash their shoes. On the contrary, the professor cannot disagree more, reasoning that cleaning shoes is not a practical solution. Apart from that, the spores can be spread quickly from water streams, in a long distance.
The second argument the author gives is that there are chemicals that can be used to protect the oak trees. Therefore, these chemicals stimulate natural defense against the fungus. However, the lecturer cannot be more outraged, explaining that the injection it may be fine for a few trees not for a thousand of them, it is impossible that the forest men can inject all those oak trees.This idea sound impractical.
Lastly, on one hand, the passage points out that another way to fight P. ramorum is by clear- cutting the trees that are already infected, But it is also involves cutting and burning the vegetations that are surrounding the oaks.The professor argues that this practice is ok, but it does not guaranty us that we are going to save those trees that are very rare to grow. Additionally, in the past, people preserved these trees, by using different ways to protect them from potential risks.Therefore, many vegetation that are healthy and rare, it should be protected.
Although, the text suggests three methods in supporting the protection of oak tree, The lecturer believes that none of them are persuasive.
The author states the methods of protecting the forest trees oaks from the spread of dangerous P. ramorum fungus. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter - argues that viewpoint trying to prove these three methods do not seem convincing.
First and foremost, the writer mentions that P. ramorum spores should be stopped spreading from hikers or bicycle trails, suggesting that these small spores can be eliminate by encourage hikers to wash their shoes. On the contrary, the professor cannot disagree more, reasoning that cleaning shoes is not a practical solution. Apart from that, the spores can be spread quickly from water streams, in a long distance.
The second argument the author gives is that there are chemicals that can be used to protect the oak trees. Therefore, these chemicals stimulate natural defense against the fungus. However, the lecturer cannot be more outraged, explaining that the injection it may be fine for a few trees not for a thousand of them, it is impossible that the forest men can inject all those oak trees.This idea sound impractical.
Lastly, on one hand, the passage points out that another way to fight P. ramorum is by clear- cutting the trees that are already infected, But it is also involves cutting and burning the vegetations that are surrounding the oaks.The professor argues that this practice is ok, but it does not guaranty us that we are going to save those trees that are very rare to grow. Additionally, in the past, people preserved these trees, by using different ways to protect them from potential risks.Therefore, many vegetation that are healthy and rare, it should be protected.
Although, the text suggests three methods in supporting the protection of oak tree, The lecturer believes that none of them are persuasive.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 273, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...aining that the injection it may be fine for a few trees not for a thousand of th...
^^
Line 5, column 387, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: This
...rest men can inject all those oak trees.This idea sound impractical. Lastly, on o...
^^^^
Line 7, column 230, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...getations that are surrounding the oaks.The professor argues that this practice is ...
^^^
Line 7, column 489, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Therefore
...ys to protect them from potential risks.Therefore, many vegetation that are healthy and r...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 500, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun vegetation seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much vegetation', 'a good deal of vegetation'.
Suggestion: much vegetation; a good deal of vegetation
...ct them from potential risks.Therefore, many vegetation that are healthy and rare, it should be...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, lastly, may, second, so, therefore, apart from, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 10.4613686534 191% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 22.412803532 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1500.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 294.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10204081633 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63414042471 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581632653061 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 442.8 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 72.7410840318 49.2860985944 148% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.384615385 110.228320801 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6153846154 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.23076923077 7.06452816374 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.427144541878 0.272083759551 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.151917903356 0.0996497079465 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.177645479382 0.0662205650399 268% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.289171092884 0.162205337803 178% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.327261825939 0.0443174109184 738% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.3589403974 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.6 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.