The lecturer and the reading passage discuss a topic of salvage logging, which is a way to remove dead trees after forest fires. The lecturer casts doubt on several key benefits of this method as they are presented in the passage.
For one thing, the lecturer states that the decaying process of dead trees enriches the soil, which can make the soil more suitable for new trees. However, according to the passage, new trees cannot be planted without removing dead trees. The lecturer illustrates that new trees may lack nutrients if dead trees are removed directly, which makes the passage less tenable. This is the first obvious divergence where the lecturer disagrees with the passage.
In addition to the value of the dead trees and space they take up, the lecturer goes on to refute the passage by saying that insects like spruce bark beetles are not harmful. Besides, dead trees also provide habitats for some birds, which are contributors to the area. In contrast, the passage illustrates that spruce bark beetles are dangerous and salvage logging may help minimize the loss, which is less convincing. This is the second explicit point where the lecturer opposes the passage.
Finally, the lecturer indicates that removing dead trees may be expensive because it involves helicopters and other vehicles, which is contrary to the statement in the passage where dead trees can be used in production by some factories. Furthermore, the passage states that removing dead trees provides more jobs for local residents; however, the lecturer counters this claim by saying that these jobs are temporary and many workers are actually outsiders instead of local people, which is a contradiction to the passage. This is the last point the lecturer uses to demolish the passage.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, besides, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, second, so, in addition, in contrast, for one thing
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1489.0 1373.03311258 108% => OK
No of words: 292.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09931506849 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45508298131 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.489726027397 0.540411800872 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 457.2 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => 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: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.5145663499 49.2860985944 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.538461538 110.228320801 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4615384615 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.84615384615 7.06452816374 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
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 : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.328200683086 0.272083759551 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.130856139171 0.0996497079465 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0766169773655 0.0662205650399 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.222986337082 0.162205337803 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0191045123684 0.0443174109184 43% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.6 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.51 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.