The reading and the lecture are both about cheatgrass that lives in North America and caused enormous problems for the animals and the land. More specifically, in regard to the passage, the writer presents three theories about how to solve cheatgrass problem. The lecturer disputes the claims made in the article. His position is that these methods will not work very well in controlling cheatgrass.
First and foremost, the author of the reading states stimulate grazers to eat cheatgrass which enhance in grwoing other types of grass like native grass. The article mentions that this plan can works because there are many livestocks in North America. This argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that grazers do not perefer eating cheatgrass and they tend to the native grass. Additionally, he points out that this plan will make opposite effect by reducing the native grass in the land.
Secondly, the author suggest burning the cheatgrass which takes short time and easier than the native grass. In the article it is said that this will open new spaces for the other plants to grow. Again, the professor specifically addresses this point when he states if the cheatgrass were burnt, it will back quicly because it has seeds underground that will not harm from the fire. He goes on to say that these seeds will spread out and new grass will grow.
Finally, the author brings his argument to a close by suggesting that using fungal parasite to destroy and stop produce the cheatgrass like in Asia and Europe. Not surprisingly, the lecturer takes issue with this claim by contending that cheatgrass and this fungus lived togther for thousands of years, so cheatgrass developed a resistent and immunity to this fungus. He notes that fungus harm only the weak grass, but the healthy and strong grass will mot be effected, so this plan not efficient.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 194, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[2]
Message: The verb 'can' requires the base form of the verb: 'work'
Suggestion: work
...The article mentions that this plan can works because there are many livestocks in No...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, if, second, secondly, so, well, in regard to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1549.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 313.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94888178914 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20616286096 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45629768552 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536741214058 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 452.7 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.9914764471 49.2860985944 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.8125 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5625 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.0625 7.06452816374 58% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.214464155073 0.272083759551 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0706911380967 0.0996497079465 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0394240482515 0.0662205650399 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127565051253 0.162205337803 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.028272000141 0.0443174109184 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 53.8541721854 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 11.0289183223 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 194, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[2]
Message: The verb 'can' requires the base form of the verb: 'work'
Suggestion: work
...The article mentions that this plan can works because there are many livestocks in No...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, if, second, secondly, so, well, in regard to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1549.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 313.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94888178914 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20616286096 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45629768552 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536741214058 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 452.7 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.9914764471 49.2860985944 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.8125 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5625 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.0625 7.06452816374 58% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.214464155073 0.272083759551 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0706911380967 0.0996497079465 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0394240482515 0.0662205650399 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127565051253 0.162205337803 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.028272000141 0.0443174109184 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 53.8541721854 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 11.0289183223 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.