The reading and the lecture are both about the effects of palm trees' expantion on the environment and the economy. The author of the reading believes that producing palm oil has multiple advantages and should be promoted. The claims made by the author are challenged by the lecturer. She is of the opinion that expantion of palm trees have adverse impacts on the environment.
First of all, the author suggests that palm tree farming is beneficial for forests. It is said in the reading that due to the amount of oil produced by these trees, less forests need to be cleared compared to other crops. The lecturer refutes this specific argument. She states that although palm trees produce more value relative to other crops, the high demand from society will lead to more crops being cleared and accordingly, more deforestations.
Secondly, the author posits that palm oil can be substituted for fossil fuels due to their less carbon emission, and less carbon emission can have positive effects to the environment. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by remarking that producing oil from palm trees require as much carbon transmition. She elaborates on this by mentioning that lands should be cleared from peat in order to grow palm trees, and the existing vegetation should be burned which will cause a significant amount of carbon emission she mentioned.
Finally, the author proposes that palm tree production can benefit low-income family farmers. It is claimed in the reading that most of the lands cleared for this task are cleared by low-income families. The lecturer, on the other hand, believes that at first, the production is managed by these families, but over time, they will lose control. She notes that the high demand for palm tree oil, will intrigue many companies, and these companies will gradually take control of the profits from families with meager incomes.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 166, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun forests is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
... amount of oil produced by these trees, less forests need to be cleared compared to ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, first of all, on the other hand
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 : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1263.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 247.0 270.72406181 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.11336032389 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96437052324 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52813180862 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.550607287449 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 374.4 419.366225166 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.0967658678 49.2860985944 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.818181818 110.228320801 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4545454545 21.698381199 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.09090909091 7.06452816374 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 4.09492273731 73% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => 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: 0.272836408295 0.272083759551 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.105188862277 0.0996497079465 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0441218926473 0.0662205650399 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.187905557117 0.162205337803 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0270588637088 0.0443174109184 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.3589403974 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.88 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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
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.