The reading passage states that several methods can be used to protect the forest from infecting by P. ramorum, whereas the professor points out that these methods have serious limitation.
Firstly, the author insists that P. ramorum spores can be spread by human activities and we can stop this way by wash shoes and install new bike scrubbers. The professor, however, argues that this measure will help a little and not cause a huge impact. Because the spores not only just spread through human system, and it is mainly spread by rain and water which makes it hard to control spores' spread.
Secondly, the reading says that we should use fungicidal chemicals to protect oak trees. In contrast, the speaker reckons that it indeed can be effective, but the injection need to be repeat few months later. So it will work only when there are few trees needed to protect like parks. This practice cannot protect the whole forest and repeating injection in forest is impractical and expensive.
Lastly, the reading states that we can cut and burn these infected trees and plants around them which may be infected while seem like healthy. On the contrary, the professor deems that the healthy trees will be devastated in that way. For instance, there are many rare trees in western American forest which can not bring back easily after burning. In this way, it will cause a great ecological damage.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 377, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[5]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'great ecological damage'.
Suggestion: great ecological damage
...ter burning. In this way, it will cause a great ecological damage.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, whereas, while, for instance, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 5.04856512141 277% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1164.0 1373.03311258 85% => OK
No of words: 238.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.89075630252 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92775363542 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.28801478398 2.5805825403 89% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.588235294118 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 342.0 419.366225166 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.0295772565 49.2860985944 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.1428571429 110.228320801 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 21.698381199 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.78571428571 7.06452816374 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 10.1 13.3589403974 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 71.14 53.8541721854 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 11.0289183223 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.79 12.2367328918 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.73 8.42419426049 92% => OK
difficult_words: 49.0 63.6247240618 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.