TPO 14
In this set of materials, the reading passage discusses that the salvage logging approached would be beneficial for both forests and the local economy of those areas. While in the listening the professor casts doubt on what is presented in the text and believes that this method would not be beneficial in the long-term for forest healthy, and also its economic benefits are questionable.
First of all, in the text, it is clearly mentioned that the dead trees remain for years at the surface of forests and limits space for the growth of new plants. In this way, forests recovering from fire take a very long time. However, the professor claims that the process of decomposition of dead trees, adds a lot of valuable nutritional substance to soil that makes the soil richer and more fertile. Therefore, without these dead bodies, forests would face with nutrients shortage in the future.
In addition, the professor disagrees with this idea that because dead trees can provide favorable habit to the growth of harmful insects. She says that the dead body of trees does not just provoke good house to increase harmful insects, they provide a field for birds and useful insects too. Whereby, in the long-term, it can improve forests' health.
Finally, yet importantly, in the text, it is stated that the salvage logging would power the economy of local settlements. The professor subscribes that the economic advantages of this approach is small and does not long lasting. In this method, dead trees should be collected using a helicopter which would be so expensive to use and maintain. Furthermore, conducting this plan can not employ local workers and required outside labors.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 222, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[3]
Message: The verb 'does' requires base form of the verb: 'last'
Suggestion: last
...his approach is small and does not long lasting. In this method, dead trees should be c...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, furthermore, however, so, therefore, while, in addition, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1408.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 279.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04659498208 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08696624509 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5771232439 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.559139784946 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 420.3 419.366225166 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 2.5761589404 311% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.0962153518 49.2860985944 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.307692308 110.228320801 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4615384615 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06452816374 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.338483183175 0.272083759551 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117449594497 0.0996497079465 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0540350446732 0.0662205650399 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.200337611177 0.162205337803 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0491783989873 0.0443174109184 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.3589403974 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.01 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.