Suppression of forest fires
In the lecture, the professor made several points about the effects of forest fires. The professor argues that forests fires can actually bo good for forests, not bad. The talk by the professor however, is different from the reading. According to the reading, forest fires are harmful to the land and should be stopped. But the professor casts doubt on that view with several points.
The first point the teacher makes is that if there are too many trees, it is hard for some trees to get light and nutrition. This means that the trees are not healthy. The professor’s point is different from the reading. The reading states that it is good to have a lot of trees in the forest. But the lecture shows that too many trees is actually bad for the forest.
Another point made by the professor is that burning a forest actually puts more nutrients into the land. This is not what the reading says. The reading says that fires take nutrients out of the soil. However, the professor says there are more nutrients at the top for plants to use.
In conclusion, the professor challenges the claims in the reading by showing that forest fires are sometimes needed for a healthy forest.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, however, if, so, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 983.0 1373.03311258 72% => OK
No of words: 209.0 270.72406181 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.7033492823 5.08290768461 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.80221413058 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.36639515113 2.5805825403 92% => OK
Unique words: 101.0 145.348785872 69% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.483253588517 0.540411800872 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 285.3 419.366225166 68% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 26.9267318642 49.2860985944 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 65.5333333333 110.228320801 59% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 13.9333333333 21.698381199 64% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.46666666667 7.06452816374 49% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.241470718455 0.272083759551 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0896272946379 0.0996497079465 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0999259605902 0.0662205650399 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180337223512 0.162205337803 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0904070991528 0.0443174109184 204% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 7.7 13.3589403974 58% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 75.2 53.8541721854 140% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.0 11.0289183223 54% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 9.39 12.2367328918 77% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.55 8.42419426049 78% => OK
difficult_words: 30.0 63.6247240618 47% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.2008830022 62% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.