The author claims that salvage logging is beneficial not only to the damaged forest but also to the economy. The lecturer, however, casts doubt on that claim by saying that actually, that practice is not beneficial neither to the forest, not to the economy.
First, the article asserts that by removing the dead trees from the forest, there is more space for new trees to grow. Besides, decaying wood is habitat for harmful insects, such as the spruce bark beetle. On the other hand, the lecture argues that cleaning up the forest will not help the trees to grow since dead trees create a natural process which enriches the soil. Salvage logging removes the soil nutrients which are necessary for the growth of new trees. Besides, the speaker contends that insects which live in dead wood have been living in the forest for years and have not damaged the forest so far. Moreover, dead trees are also habitats for other animals, such as birds.
Second, the reading contends that the economy benefits from salvage logging as industries use the damaged wood and it prevents fire which is very harmful to the economy. Apart from that, salvage logging creates new job positions. Nevertheless, the lecture refutes this point by saying that expensive vehicles are necessary to remove dead trees, such as helicopters, so that does not help the economy. Regarding the new jobs positions, the lecturer asserts that those are temporary and in fact, local worker does not have the experience necessary for this kind of job.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, besides, but, first, however, moreover, nevertheless, regarding, second, so, apart from, in fact, kind of, such as, 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: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => 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: 1264.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 256.0 270.72406181 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.9375 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.27877380593 2.5805825403 88% => OK
Unique words: 130.0 145.348785872 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5078125 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 382.5 419.366225166 91% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => 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: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.1105981658 49.2860985944 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.333333333 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3333333333 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.4166666667 7.06452816374 176% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 4.09492273731 73% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => 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: 0.56181478489 0.272083759551 206% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.205794963157 0.0996497079465 207% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0792483397572 0.0662205650399 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.342079589693 0.162205337803 211% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.131194415553 0.0443174109184 296% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
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: 11.37 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.95 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => 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: 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.