The reading and the listening passages are both about increasing pressure of world’s forests because of the imperial trends. While the article of the reading provides three suggestions that would solve this problem, the lecturer casts doubt on these suggestions.
The author of the reading states that using established forest protection international funds to disperse this funds to governments, landowners, and farmers will help to develop the forests and ensure that agricultural is uninterrupted by industries or oil companies. The professor, on the other hand, says with the increase in the population farmers will need to use modern technology to farm. They will use fertilization and pesticides which will pollute the water and disturb the ecosystem.
In addition, the reading mentions that using the international funds to provide for villagers and tribal residents a monthly stipend will help these people to resist the pressure of these companies and will help the people to continue their education and living. So, they are less tempted to resort destructive. The lecturer, however, contends that the money might not go to the farmers. Also, it might be that the government will not use to protect the forests.
Finally, the writer states that people can use international funds to help the government to maintain valuable forest diversity and protect species from extinction. The professor rebuts this point. He states that people will plant commercial plants. This will not build a biodiversity.
All in all, the lecturer debunks all the three solutions.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 436, Rule ID: USE_TO_VERB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'used'?
Suggestion: used
...t might be that the government will not use to protect the forests. Finally, the...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, so, while, in addition, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 10.4613686534 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 5.04856512141 277% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1341.0 1373.03311258 98% => OK
No of words: 246.0 270.72406181 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.4512195122 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96035189615 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87958998282 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.552845528455 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 393.3 419.366225166 94% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => 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: 73.9241544574 49.2860985944 150% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.7857142857 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5714285714 21.698381199 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 7.06452816374 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => 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: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.245645369847 0.272083759551 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0715532819617 0.0996497079465 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0684622175231 0.0662205650399 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116640458952 0.162205337803 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0773365822415 0.0443174109184 175% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.03 12.2367328918 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.17 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.