The widespread phenomenon of mass communication through cell phones and the internet has
spurred enormous controversy. Many believe that people have become less able to build bonds
with friends and family members. It is impossible to deny that social media is constantly
changing the way that people interact with one another. With the advent of new technologies that
allow for non-simultaneous and distant interaction, people all over the world are now able to
build relationships in a way that was formerly not possible. Some might say that this is a
negative trend, but this new development opens up for unique and effective connections.
People often feel estranged in their surroundings. There are so many hobbies and interests that
people enjoy, that it can be difficult to find someone who shares the same passions. Social media
is of huge benefit to these people as they are empowered with opportunity for connection to a
widespread community and countless resources. Some may have always wanted to learn more
about a topic without having an avenue to jump in. Social media has proved itself to be effective
in educating people of all ages on a variety of subjects ranging from rollerblading to string
theory.
Moreover, the internet is especially helpful for helping people find a voice. Whereas the first
amendment protects our right to free speech, many people feel that they have lost their ability to
be heard. Social media allows us all to find a new way to speak confidently and ensures that
every person has the opportunity to be heard.
Describe the risks discussed in the lecture and explain how they relate to the purpose of the
reading passage.
The reading passage and lecturer both talk about bears. While the author argues that it can be dangerous for humans to coexist with bears, the lecturer feels that it is absolutely safe.
First of all, according to the reading passage, when bears doesn’t fear someone, they are more likely to attack them; therefore, people who feed bear and stay close to them are more likely to be attacked by them since they see them as food source. However, the lectures disputes this arguement. He thinks that bears won’t attack people whom he trusts. To bolster his claims he provides example of Minnesota where people and bears are living together since 40 years. He also provides example of pensilvenia where 7000 people live with 21 bears.
Secondly, the author of the reading passage believes that bears are aggressive. He mentions some early signs of a bear attack such as standing on the hind leg, luft and growl and slapping the ground. However, the lecturer contends these signs. The lecturer asserts that when bear is standing on hind leg he is trying to get a better view, and luft and growl are to communicate dominance.
Lastly, the author suggests that the best way to rescue from bear attack is to Run, Climb, and using a gun. However, the lecturer challenges this argument by stating that instead of running we should talk to bear, climb the tree as even bears are capable to do so, and it is better to use lethal pepper spray instead of gun on bear.
In conclusion, both the reading passage and author talks about bears and ways to rescue from a bear attack. However, the lecturer challenges 3 main points specified by the author.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...where 7000 people live with 21 bears. Secondly, the author of the reading pass...
^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d growl are to communicate dominance. Lastly, the author suggests that the bes...
^^^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... pepper spray instead of gun on bear. In conclusion, both the reading passage ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, in conclusion, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => 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: 1367.0 1373.03311258 100% => OK
No of words: 286.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 4.77972027972 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.29628724398 2.5805825403 89% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.531468531469 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 399.6 419.366225166 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.7083185474 49.2860985944 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.1333333333 110.228320801 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0666666667 21.698381199 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.33333333333 7.06452816374 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0326520517334 0.272083759551 12% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.014298768733 0.0996497079465 14% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0177979245949 0.0662205650399 27% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0171039572653 0.162205337803 11% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0158167348705 0.0443174109184 36% => 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: 10.6 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 53.8541721854 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 11.0289183223 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.44 12.2367328918 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.95 8.42419426049 83% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 63.6247240618 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => 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.