This material addresses the process which is called salvage logging and implies removal of tress damaged from fire or other disasters. The reading passage suggests that this practice is advantageous. The lecturer, on the other, refutes this information by stating that the long lasting results of cleaning forests from dead trees are harmful.
To begin with, the reading passage highlights that the removal of damaged trees is necessary for the growth of new ones since the process of their decomposition is too long and hinders the restoration of forests. Meanwhile, the professor casts doubt on this and argues that dead trees should remain in forests inasmuch as their decomposition process is necessary for enriching the soil with nutrients. The latter are crucial for the growth of new plants.
Additionally, the article posits that the damaged trees are being inhabited by harmful insects and, consequently, their removal from the forest is a contribution to its health. However, the professor advocates a different approach and provides the following details. Namely, she mentions that the trees under consideration are inhabited by birds and other forms of life which actually are necessary for the environment of forests. As to the harmful insects, the professor claims that they lived in the forests of Alaska for many years and did not harm the environment.
Finally, the author invites attention to the fact that the salvage logging implies some economic benefits such as using the damaged wood in industry and new working places in the region. This goes counter to the information in the listening passage, according to which, expenses outweigh possible profits since helicopters and other vehicles are needed to clean forests; furthermore, the working places are not permanent and they involve experienced employers from out of local region.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, consequently, finally, furthermore, however, if, so, while, as to, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1566.0 1373.03311258 114% => OK
No of words: 293.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.34470989761 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13729897018 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74278324065 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529010238908 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 471.6 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.8092821713 49.2860985944 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.5 110.228320801 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4166666667 21.698381199 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 7.06452816374 123% => OK
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 : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.363920354699 0.272083759551 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.121970695672 0.0996497079465 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0647158183451 0.0662205650399 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.203326985464 0.162205337803 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0454601350724 0.0443174109184 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 13.3589403974 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.99 12.2367328918 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.46 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 63.6247240618 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => 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.