The reading material and the lecture both discussed the impacts of growing broccoli in East Coast. The author of the article feels that there are certain benefits to grow broccoli in East Coast. The lecturer disputes the claims in the article. Her position is that moving broccoli to East Coast may not become successful.
According to the reading passage, cultivate broccoli in East Coast can reduce its selling price. The article mentions that the distribution of locally grown broccoli costs lower than transporting from California. The lecturer challenges this specific argument. She claims that it is not practical to make new broccoli cheaper in this way. Additionally, she points out that the lower yield in East Coast pushes local groceries to uprise the selling price, which will cancel out the savings made from transportation.
Secondly, the author suggests that a new type of broccoli can be more attractive to local consumers. The article says that hot-resistant broccoli is developed by crossbreeding instead of the controversial genetic modification technology. The lecturer, however, asserts that the new type of broccoli can still be suspicious for customers. She says that since the broccoli is from the same company that developed genetically modified products, people usually lose the trust of all products from this company.
Finally, the author posits that locally cultivated broccoli is healthier than what was grown in California. The author contends that local broccoli saves more nutrients from losing during transportation. In contrast, the lecturer's stance is that the nutrients aspect is not a good argument for growing broccoli in East Coast. She notes that the kale has similar nutrients to broccolis, grows all year round, also in fall and winter in local farms.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 196, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...enefits to grow broccoli in East Coast. The lecturer disputes the claims in the art...
^^^
Line 7, column 222, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lecturers'' or 'lecturer's'?
Suggestion: lecturers'; lecturer's
...during transportation. In contrast, the lecturers stance is that the nutrients aspect is ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 251, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'nutrients'' or 'nutrient's'?
Suggestion: nutrients'; nutrient's
...trast, the lecturers stance is that the nutrients aspect is not a good argument for growi...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1521.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 283.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37455830389 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80003620948 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.52296819788 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 454.5 419.366225166 108% => 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: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.4418878294 49.2860985944 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.4705882353 110.228320801 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.6470588235 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.58823529412 7.06452816374 65% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => 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: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.484004004694 0.272083759551 178% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.16927762074 0.0996497079465 170% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0865504980365 0.0662205650399 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.302814468114 0.162205337803 187% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0431341927586 0.0443174109184 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.57 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.7273730684 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.