The city enjoys urban forests not only in the city square, the municipal parks, and golf courses, but also along many streets in the city. The forest, boasting almost 700,000 trees, was planted during the late 17th century, but since the 1920s, planting has not kept pace with the losses from age, disease, storms, and development. An urban forest plan is needed that incorporates the following points: legislation to protect the existing forest, support to maintain and conserve the trees, and a public information campaign.
Legislation would have to include a temporary moratorium on development in areas where mature trees would be harmed and ordinances that would protect and nurture mature trees currently growing on industrial, institutional, and residential land.
Support to maintain and conserve the trees should be twofold. First, public funds should be allocated for this purpose. An adequate budget for maintenance of trees in parks and along city streets must be included in several city departments and funded by a small increase in city taxes. Equally important, however, private funds should be solicited through initiatives such as memorial tree plantings, adopt-a-tree programs, and a tree endowment fund.
As the final portion of the plan, a public information campaign would be essential to educate local residents and businesses. Otherwise, the advantages of the urban forests would not be understood and, therefore, not encouraged. Besides enhancing the landscape and improving the lifestyle of residents and visitors, trees mitigate air pollution, provide natural shade, cool the surrounding area, and reduce ultraviolet radiation. They also provide habitats for wildlife in the city.
<p style="white-space: normal;">The reading passage argues that an urban forest plan is needed and it has to incorporate legislation, double support and public information campaign. However, the lecturer states that those idea did not show to be successful in the past. In fact, they were destined to fail.</p><p style="white-space: normal;">To begin with, the article asserts that human development which could harm mature trees should be limited through legislation. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that laws are always too complicated to be understood by the public. In addition, she mentions that people do not abide by the laws sometimes because the law by itself is not a sufficient deterrence.</p><p style="white-space: normal;">Moreover, the article holds that support for urban forests should be increased two folds by securing funds both from private and public sources, including raising city taxes to cover those expenses. Nevertheless, the speaker in the lecture contends that private funding is not guaranteed as in the past it only accounted for 20% of the plan budget and public funding was 80%. More importantly, using taxpayers money is not recommended as people should help voluntarily.</p><p style="white-space: normal;">Finally, the author assumes that educating the public about the benefits of trees and urban forests will encourage people to act. In Contrast, the lecturer indicates that most campaigns focus on vague goals with ambiguous information that is not directly beneficial for the individual. she proposes that campaigns should elaborate on how executing this plan would help the community to have better golf courses and cleaner parks</p>
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 227, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this idea' or 'those ideas'?
Suggestion: this idea; those ideas
...aign. However, the lecturer states that those idea did not show to be successful in the pa...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 1576, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...directly beneficial for the individual. she proposes that campaigns should elaborat...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, however, moreover, nevertheless, so, as to, in addition, in contrast, in fact, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1468.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 254.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.77952755906 5.08290768461 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99216450694 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 4.07298258999 2.5805825403 158% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.629921259843 0.540411800872 117% => OK
syllable_count: 433.8 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 82.2962129546 49.2860985944 167% => OK
Chars per sentence: 163.111111111 110.228320801 148% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.2222222222 21.698381199 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.3333333333 7.06452816374 189% => OK
Paragraphs: 1.0 4.09492273731 24% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.062933177027 0.272083759551 23% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0247935266489 0.0996497079465 25% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0248665721758 0.0662205650399 38% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.062933177027 0.162205337803 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 19.9 13.3589403974 149% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.6 53.8541721854 64% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 5.55761589404 234% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.0289183223 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.54 12.2367328918 135% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.63 8.42419426049 114% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.7273730684 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted. The correct pattern:
para 1: introduction
para 2: doubt 1
para 3: doubt 2
para 4: doubt 3
Less contents wanted from the reading passages(25%), more content wanted from the lecture (75%).
Don't need a conclusion paragraph.
Read sample essays from ETS:
http://www.testbig.com/users/toeflwritingmaster
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.