developing international forest protection fund can significantly help to protect the forests from human activities
The reading states that developing international forest protection fund can significantly help to protect the forests from human activities and gives reasons of support. However, the professor explains that the although the forest is under pressure due to the industries, but the idea of developing an international monetary fund is inaccurate. He explains that the suggestion in the reading passage are flawed. Thus, he refutes each of the author’s reasons.
First, the article claims that providing funds to the government , landowners and the farmers will keep them away from intruding the forests for logs and oil. The professor refutes this by saying that agriculture itself puts destructive force on the ecosystem. These days, farmers are using modern techniques like use of harmful pesticides and chemicals to raise the harvest yield. These chemicals not only crete runoff waste but also causes water pollution. Therefore, agriculture is even more worse that logging industries .
Second, the reading posits that dispersing funds to the villages and the tribal communities located in the forest can help develop their economy and thus reduce their tendency of destroying forest for their living. The lecturer challenges this point by stating that its not an adequate solution. Even though the international funds get distributed to these areas, yet the money will be handed over to the forest owner that is the government and not the residents of that region. They might not get the given share of funds. Also, even if government gives the money to the villagers yet, its not a guarantee that they will use that money appropriately to protect the forest.
Finally, the article posits that the international forest fund could help government and the people to establish protected forest areas and maintain the valuable forest biodiversity. The professor disagrees to this and explains that even if the funds are used to create biodiversity, the people will plant more of the trees which have commercial use for them. Consequently, the planting will have nothing to do with the goal of conserving the trees in forest.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 208, Rule ID: THE_EXACTLY_THE[1]
Message: Duplicated 'the' in the phrase: 'the although the'. Did you mean 'although the'?
Suggestion: although the
...t. However, the professor explains that the although the forest is under pressure due to the ind...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 65, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...s that providing funds to the government , landowners and the farmers will keep th...
^^
Line 5, column 491, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'worse' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: worse
...llution. Therefore, agriculture is even more worse that logging industries . Second, ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 525, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... even more worse that logging industries . Second, the reading posits that di...
^^
Line 9, column 588, Rule ID: IT_IS[6]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
...t gives the money to the villagers yet, its not a guarantee that they will use that...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, first, however, if, second, so, therefore, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1805.0 1373.03311258 131% => OK
No of words: 339.0 270.72406181 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32448377581 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29091512845 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8079787594 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.522123893805 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 546.3 419.366225166 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.9094676283 49.2860985944 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.176470588 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9411764706 21.698381199 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.76470588235 7.06452816374 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.441275955405 0.272083759551 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.122740340593 0.0996497079465 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.198147223823 0.0662205650399 299% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.273654572623 0.162205337803 169% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.165405001054 0.0443174109184 373% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.3589403974 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 63.6247240618 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.