TPO20
Both, the reading and the lecture, talk about a policy followed by the authorities in the USA called “let’s it burn”. While detractors present three arguments against this strategy, the lecturer explains that fires are natural processes that bring many benefits. She refutes each reason presented, causing doubts in the author’s beliefs.
Firstly, the reading points out that Yellowstone fire in 1988 provoked serious affectations on the trees and on the small plants, until the point that at least one third of the plants suffered some kind of damage. However, the professor disproves this idea and notes that after this event, the park becomes more diverse, owing to new species of plants thrive there. some plants need open spaces to grow without the shadow of the big trees, and under those conditions they grew readily. Moreover, some seeds need of elevated temperatures to germinate, which was possible with the new conditions.
Secondly, the author argues that animals, such as elks and deer, were negatively affected as well. Notwithstanding, the professor contradicts this argument by saying that the population of deer recover over time. Furthermore, the new layer of vegetation created an attractive habitat for other animals like rabbits and hares, which in turn attracted predators, making some food chains more robust.
Finally, the text remarks fires that prejudice the value of the park as a tourist destination. Nonetheless, the orator highlights the weakness of this point arguing that it would be an issue if events like that occur each season, but it is not the case. Since 1988, yellowstone has not suffered any other fire of those dimensions, owing to the factors that provoked so destructive fire were fairly unusual.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 367, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Some
... to new species of plants thrive there. some plants need open spaces to grow without...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, moreover, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, third, well, while, at least, kind of, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1493.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 280.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33214285714 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09062348924 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76861971062 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 145.348785872 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.660714285714 0.540411800872 122% => OK
syllable_count: 449.1 419.366225166 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.4758167434 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.846153846 110.228320801 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5384615385 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.3076923077 7.06452816374 160% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.259452593426 0.272083759551 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0772143740285 0.0996497079465 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0528226591795 0.0662205650399 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138375824146 0.162205337803 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0415308456776 0.0443174109184 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.63 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.47 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 63.6247240618 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.