The reading and listening materials are contradicting with each other in terms of solutions to deal with the invasion of cheatgrass. The author points out three methods, however, the lecturer refutes all his theories by offering opposite opinions.
First and foremost, the author suggests that encouraging animals to feed on cheatgrass may be an effective way because cheatgrass is most prevalent in areas where cattle and other livestock are raised. However, the lecturer refutes his idea by saying that livestock does not prefer cheatgrass. If people release them in fields, they may eat protected plants first and then choose to eat cheatgrass, which will make more damage to local plants which people intentionally want to protect.
Another solution the author figures out is to burn cheatgrass with controlled fires because cheatgrass is a highly flammable plant, which means fires can eliminate them in a short time. The lecturer casts doubt about this solution by explaining that cheatgrass can come back after being burned by fires. Cheatgrass can produce many seeds, which can be preserved below the surface and survive for a long time. Normal fires can not hurt these seeds, and when the fires are gone, these seeds will grow up into cheatgrass again quickly.
The final solution proposed by the author is introducing a fungal parasite that specifically attacks cheatgrass because there is a species of fungus that has the ability to prevent cheatgrass from reproducing, while this claim is opposed by the lecturer. He says that cheatgrass has grown with this fungal parasite for a long time, and is able to develop resistance toward the damage caused by this parasite. Only weak cheatgrass can be affected by this parasite while most of the normal cheatgrass is not influenced, which means this method can not be effective.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, may, so, then, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1540.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 298.0 270.72406181 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1677852349 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15483772266 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65050543217 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.546979865772 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 461.7 419.366225166 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.036821012 49.2860985944 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.333333333 110.228320801 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8333333333 21.698381199 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.33333333333 7.06452816374 47% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
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: 0.148652013858 0.272083759551 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0590330880728 0.0996497079465 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.030948010281 0.0662205650399 47% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0880447259405 0.162205337803 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0215758462291 0.0443174109184 49% => 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: 15.3 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.