In terms of whether "let it burn" policy is damaging or beneficial for Yellowstone forest, the author in the reading passage and the professor in the listening are contradictory to each other.
First, as to the belief in the reading part that this policy caused a huge damage to the forest and destroyed plants and vegetations, the professor opposes this idea. She refutes by stating that vegetations had started over after the fire died with more diversity. Moreover, this policy created a chance for small plants to grow in the land. additionally, she declares that the seeds would not be terminated unless with intensive heat.
The second opposing view between the professor and the author is concerning the park wildlife. The reading passage states that many animals run away from the forest because of the fire, also it destroyed their habitat. Conversely, the professor thinks differently by saying that this fire creates a chance for other animals to habitat such as rabbits. This habitation brings other hunt animals to feed on them. Eventually, after the fire, the land became much better for animal living and settlement.
Last, contrary to the belief in the reading passage that the fire caused local economic problems and dropping of visitors, she cast doubts on this point by mentioning that only this time of the fire was unusual because of a combination of rain and strong wind. However, the visitors started to come the following year after this fire died out. Moreover, the local businesses got recovered.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 69, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'huge damage'.
Suggestion: huge damage
...he reading part that this policy caused a huge damage to the forest and destroyed plants and ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 343, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Additionally
...e for small plants to grow in the land. additionally, she declares that the seeds would not ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 63, Rule ID: THE_NN_AND_THE_NN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'are'?
Suggestion: are
...ew between the professor and the author is concerning the park wildlife. The readi...
^^
Line 5, column 63, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...ew between the professor and the author is concerning the park wildlife. The reading passage ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, conversely, first, however, if, moreover, second, so, as to, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => 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: 1292.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 252.0 270.72406181 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.12698412698 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98428260373 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59938506595 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.563492063492 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 398.7 419.366225166 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.306068579 49.2860985944 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.3846153846 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3846153846 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.69230769231 7.06452816374 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.288486903113 0.272083759551 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0990946258779 0.0996497079465 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0443284972674 0.0662205650399 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171179532992 0.162205337803 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0252003768017 0.0443174109184 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.