TPO 20
The lecture and the reading discuss the let it burn policy and forest fire in Yellowstone in 1988. Although the passage claims that let it burn policy had caused several damages in the Yellowstone, the speaker refutes this idea through several reasons which I will describe in this reporter.
First and foremost, the passage points out that the Yellowstone forest fire had been plentiful damages of trees and vegetable. The lecturer, in contrast, rejects this by claiming that new species planets were growing in the scorch, and scorched where colonize for new plants. She explains that plants and trees became more diversity after burning. Because small vegetable that lived in a shadow would have new opportunities for growth and receive sunlight. Also, some seeds need a high temperature for starting to grow, and the fire created opportunities for these planets.
Furthermore, unlike the passage which states that many animals lived in the Yellowstone started to scape the fire; hence, the diversity of animals became decries. The professor argues that the fire makes new opportunities and ideal habitant for small animals like rabbits and herds. They start to live in the burnt tree trunks. Also, other animals came back to the Yellowstone for finding food. Hence, small animals became stranger than before burning.
Finally, although the reading passage says that the attraction of the park was decreased so that the number of tourists decreased. The speaker disagrees by mentioning that the forest fire like Yellowstone fire happened unusual situation like low rainfall. And these situations did not happen every year. Also, we have been not seeing the burning like the Yellow stone burn.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-25 | Apolytos | 70 | view |
| 2022-01-18 | lutzuming | 80 | view |
| 2021-12-28 | Pooja dave | 80 | view |
| 2021-12-28 | Pooja dave | 80 | view |
| 2021-05-16 | mahi22 | 80 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 12, column 375, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...the burning like the Yellow stone burn.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, furthermore, hence, if, so, in contrast
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: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1461.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 272.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37132352941 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50243987774 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558823529412 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 434.7 419.366225166 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.706142758 49.2860985944 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.3125 110.228320801 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 21.698381199 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.8125 7.06452816374 54% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.361561571074 0.272083759551 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107264685438 0.0996497079465 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0719088888113 0.0662205650399 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.206366112522 0.162205337803 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0307164199589 0.0443174109184 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.57 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => 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.