Because of climate change, more and more land that was once used to grow crops or provide food for animals is turning to dry, unusable desert land. There are many proposals about how to stop this process, known as desertification. A number of proposals involve growing trees, because trees can help protect soil and provide many other benefits to fight against desertification. Some scientists have proposed that the best way to grow trees in dry areas in danger of desertification is by using a box-shaped device surrounding the young tree. The device collects water that condenses from vapor in the atmosphere and helps the tree to grow. However, other scientists believe that this device will not be successful in fighting against desertification for the following reasons.
First, at a cost of 25 U S. dollars each, the device would make growing trees a prohibitively expensive process. Meaningful efforts to fight desertification involve growing millions of trees. Some countries most affected by desertification cannot afford to buy devices for millions of trees
Second, plans for fighting desertification involve asking local people to install and maintain the devices. People living in some of the areas most affected by desertification work long days in harsh conditions: sometimes barely managing to provide food for their families. It would be difficult to motivate these people to look after trees that cannot serve as a source of food for them.
Third, the device's ability to collect and conserve water is limited. Each one provides only enough water to keep a small tree alive. Trees that have outgrown the device have to deal with unforgiving environmental conditions on their own. In some places where the devices are being tried, six months can pass without a drop of rain. Once the trees become too big for the device, they may not be able to survive in such a harsh environment.
The reading passage and the lecture offer opposing views regarding the success of box-shaped device, which would be used to help the young trees to grow, in fighting desertification. While the passage claims that those devices would not be successful because of three reasons, the professor in the lecture refutes those argument of the passage as they are unconvincing.
To begin with, the author of the article argues that in order to fight against desertification millions of trees are needed to be grown with the help of those devices, which involves a lot of investment that is too expensive for some countries. But the professor mentions that the devices can be reused: each devices can be used up to twenty times, and hence the overall cost for using the devices would be reasonable.
Secondly, the writer suggest that installation and maintenance of the devices require the contribution of local people, and motivating them would be a daunting task as they have to work hard for their bread and butter. However, the professor in the lecture claims that the water carrying capacity of those devices, after they have served their original purpose, would help the local people to grow more foods for them. Moreover, the branches of trees grown by using the devices could be used as fire woods, and these benefits are sufficient to motivate the local people to contribute in installing and maintaining process of the devices.
Finally, the professor in the lecture argues against the idea of the passage that trees grown by using the devices would not be able to survive the harsh environment of the desert. He believes that those devices would help the young trees to grow deep roots that will help the trees to gather resources from soil. According to him, recent trial to grow trees in Sahara desert has been successful as 90% of the originally planted trees using the devices have thrived even after two years of removing those devices.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 315, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this argument' or 'those arguments'?
Suggestion: this argument; those arguments
...s, the professor in the lecture refutes those argument of the passage as they are unconvincing...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 371, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...f the passage as they are unconvincing. To begin with, the author of the article...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, hence, however, if, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, so, while, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 30.3222958057 162% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1619.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 328.0 270.72406181 121% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93597560976 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25567506705 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54638519435 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.481707317073 0.540411800872 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 499.5 419.366225166 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 32.0 21.2450331126 151% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 28.9532381609 49.2860985944 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 161.9 110.228320801 147% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.8 21.698381199 151% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.7 7.06452816374 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.084992764855 0.272083759551 31% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0412361400864 0.0996497079465 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0208465491147 0.0662205650399 31% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0562972980271 0.162205337803 35% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.016150804153 0.0443174109184 36% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.2 13.3589403974 136% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.46 53.8541721854 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.0289183223 132% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.79 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 10.7273730684 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.498013245 141% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => 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.