The lecturer and the reading passage give contradictory opinions on the topic of the policy which is called "let it burn", this policy its been common practice in the United States since the late 1980's. The passage explains that the fires would burn themselves out quickly, causing large scale of damage. While, the lecturer provides several counterarguments to this view.
First, the lecturer argues that the reading passage is too general in its statement that policy is not a good one, because might cause different damages. He asserts that the policy is a good one because after the fires stop the new vegetation would thrive. He points, that some species of certain plants need to be exposed to high temperatures in order to germinate. Therefore, without these conditions they do not grow.
The lecturer also refutes the second point in the reading-that animals such as deer and elk were seem fleeting in fire and the food chains are becoming a concern for animals to survive. The professor contends that animals would extinct. He argues, that after the fire ends, new opportunity would be for different animals to thrive in an ideal habitat. Therefore, certain food chains would become stronger than before.
Finally, fires would compromised the value of the park as a tourist attraction, as a result negative consequences would affect the local economy. According to the professor, fires are not happening every year, so, this would not give an negative impact in the local economy. According to the reading, however, the local businesses that depend on park visitors would suffer as a result.
The lecturer and the reading passage give contradictory opinions on the topic of the policy which is called "let it burn", this policy its been common practice in the United States since the late 1980's. The passage explains that the fires would burn themselves out quickly, causing large scale of damage. While, the lecturer provides several counterarguments to this view.
First, the lecturer argues that the reading passage is too general in its statement that policy is not a good one, because might cause different damages. He asserts that the policy is a good one because after the fires stop the new vegetation would thrive. He points, that some species of certain plants need to be exposed to high temperatures in order to germinate. Therefore, without these conditions they do not grow.
The lecturer also refutes the second point in the reading-that animals such as deer and elk were seem fleeting in fire and the food chains are becoming a concern for animals to survive. The professor contends that animals would extinct. He argues, that after the fire ends, new opportunity would be for different animals to thrive in an ideal habitat. Therefore, certain food chains would become stronger than before.
Finally, fires would compromised the value of the park as a tourist attraction, as a result negative consequences would affect the local economy. According to the professor, fires are not happening every year, so, this would not give an negative impact in the local economy. According to the reading, however, the local businesses that depend on park visitors would suffer as a result.
- The author states the reasons that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter- argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these reasons do not seem convincing.First and foremost, the writer mentions that the in 75
- The author states about three reasons of ethanol that is not a good replacement for gasoline. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter- argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these reasons do not seem convincing.First and foremost, the writer mentions 75
- The author states the evidence of the cloud seeding which has been effective in protecting crops from hail. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter-argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these three evidence do not seem convincing.First and foremost, 75
- Word Count：299总耗时:27m35s 查看题目讨论The author states about the three kinds of damages caused by the " let it burn" policy. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter- argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these damages do not seem convin 70
- Friends are very important part of our lives Some people believe that having a friendship with a small number of people is more reliable While others argue that it is more important to make many new friends easily Personally I think that having a long fri 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 316, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “While” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...quickly, causing large scale of damage. While, the lecturer provides several countera...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 103, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eral in its statement that policy is not a good one, because might cause differen...
^^
Line 5, column 98, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'seemed'.
Suggestion: seemed
...-that animals such as deer and elk were seem fleeting in fire and the food chains ar...
^^^^
Line 7, column 22, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'compromise'
Suggestion: compromise
...er than before. Finally, fires would compromised the value of the park as a tourist attr...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 235, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...ing every year, so, this would not give an negative impact in the local economy. A...
^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rk visitors would suffer as a result.
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, second, so, therefore, while, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1366.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 264.0 270.72406181 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17424242424 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63126466153 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564393939394 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 426.6 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.431922956 49.2860985944 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.5714285714 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8571428571 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.07142857143 7.06452816374 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => 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: 0.403150931344 0.272083759551 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.11786709531 0.0996497079465 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.205546520333 0.0662205650399 310% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.249354458659 0.162205337803 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.27820805571 0.0443174109184 628% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.