There are several solutions to the cheatgrass problem
Recently, there has been a ton of doubts as to invasion cheatgrass causing problems in North American fields. More specifically, in regards to reading, the writer puts forth the idea that there are several solutions to the cheatgrass problem. In the listening passage, the lecturer is quick to point out there are serious flaws in the writer's claims. In fact, the professor believes these methods do not work very well, and addresses, in detail, the trouble with each solution made in the reading.
First and foremost, the author in the article states that encourage animals such as cattle to feed on cheatgrass. Some professionals, in the same field, however, stand in firm opposition to this idea. In the listening, for example, the professor states such animals just grazing other kinds of plants, not cheatgrass. He goes on to say that, the solution probably has opposite results and spread cheatgrass more.
One group of scholars represented by the writer think that fire is a good solution and burning the cheatgrass off the fields with controlled fire is a useful method. Of course, though, not all the experts in this field believe this is accurate. Again, the professor addresses this point when he states that seed's cheatgrass on the surface can grow quickly and also, fire can not burn seeds below the surface and they can fill so fast in the fields.
Finally, the writer wraps his argument by positing that introduce a fungal parasite that specifically attacks cheatgrass. Not surprisingly, the lecturer takes issue on this idea by contending that fungal and cheatgrass live together and these kinds of parasites can harm ill cheatgrass, not healthy grass.
To sum up, both the writer and speaker hold conflicting views about solutions made for stoping the spread of cheatgrass.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 130, Rule ID: IN_REGARD_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'regarding' or 'with regard to'.
Suggestion: regarding; with regard to
...rth American fields. More specifically, in regards to reading, the writer puts forth the idea...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, so, well, as to, for example, in fact, of course, such as, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 30.3222958057 142% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1507.0 1373.03311258 110% => OK
No of words: 296.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09121621622 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6588653444 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.567567567568 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 436.5 419.366225166 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 2.5761589404 311% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.8847226956 49.2860985944 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.642857143 110.228320801 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1428571429 21.698381199 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.35714285714 7.06452816374 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => 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: 0.346089802966 0.272083759551 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112818142602 0.0996497079465 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.111529783231 0.0662205650399 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.177036933517 0.162205337803 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0844226689724 0.0443174109184 190% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.3589403974 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.