The article and the lecture both deal with natural forest fires in the US. whilst the other of the reading thinks that the government should change their policy toward fires and extinguish them as soon as possible for three specific reasons. The lecturer opposes the author's claims. In her opinion, natural forest fires provide more creativity.
First, the writer claims that fires ruin the trees and vegetation very hard. Furthermore, it is stated in the article that in Yellowstone's fire, mostly one-third of the land burned and many of the small plants devasted completely. In contrast, the lecturer argues that this natural phenomenon in yellow stones lead to the creation of some new and diverse types of vegetation in this area. Additionally, he maintains that most of these certain plant was needed before the devastation of this national park.
Second, the author mentions that fires also influenced the park's wildlife especially, the vast majority of small animals burnt. On the top of that, he adds that this fire makes most of the people worried about habitat destruction and also disruption is the way of returning animals back to the nature. However, the lecturer calls the argument into question by saying that animals were also like plants in this process. The new trees and vegetation also provide a great opportunity for the presence of many new animals. Furthermore, he remarks that rabbits are one type of animal which starts living in this area after the fire and the creation of new habitat which has many predators. This leads to the reinforcement of the food chain.
Finally, the writer asserts that the fires diminished the number of tourists. Consequently, this affected the local economy. In fact, a large number of visitors avoid this scorched park which had a significant role in the local business of that area. As opposed to the author, the lecturer holds that if natural fires happen every year, they could have affected the local economy. She highlights that it did not happen since that time. So it also attracted tourists the next year after the natural fire greatly.
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement For success in a future job the ability to relate well to people is more important than studying hard in school 70
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement For success in a future job the ability to relate well to people is more important than studying hard in school 70
- In the United States it had been common practice since the late 1960s not to suppress natural forest fires The let it burn policy assumed that forest fire would burn themselves out quickly without causing much damage However in the summer of 1988 forest f 63
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement For success in a future job the ability to relate well to people is more important than studying hard in school 70
- TOEFL T P O 20 Integrated Writing Task 8
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 60, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'parks'' or 'park's'?
Suggestion: parks'; park's
...mentions that fires also influenced the parks wildlife especially, the vast majority ...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 134, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...is affected the local economy. In fact, a large number of visitors avoid this scorched park which...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, second, so, third, in contrast, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 22.412803532 165% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 44.0 30.3222958057 145% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.01324503311 259% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1755.0 1373.03311258 128% => OK
No of words: 350.0 270.72406181 129% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01428571429 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32530772707 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50770079262 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 145.348785872 133% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551428571429 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 542.7 419.366225166 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.2567624771 49.2860985944 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.75 110.228320801 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5 21.698381199 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.05 7.06452816374 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 10.9 13.3589403974 82% => 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: 11.48 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 63.6247240618 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.