TPO-21 - Integrated Writing Task
In light of the reading passage, one can conclude that the author believes the genetic modification of plants, which is a process used to change an organism's gene for the particular aims, can have beneficial consequences based on the reasons they highlighted in the article. On the contrary, finding the author's justification weak and lacking in terms of logic, the lecturer thoroughly and utterly repudiates this claim and gives some arguments in response.
First of all, the author drew attention to the fact that the modified trees are stronger than natural trees and can tolerate harsh circumstances. However, the lecture casts doubt on the validity of this idea. She mentions that even though trees may have notable resistance in a particular condition, it is not true about all situations. Since they are not have been designed for all climates, any alteration in weather status will affect these species seriously and will annihilate them.
Secondly, it was highlighted in the reading material that genetically modified trees are more economical and thrive faster and also contain greater amounts of harvest in comparison with their natural rivals. On the other hand, the lecture denounced this idea. The professor states that these new types cost a lot for farmers and, by law, they should pay each year to the companies which provided the seeds and, this lead to prohibitive products whether for farmers or consumers.
As the last point to substantiate the reading's claim, the author puts emphasis on the point that modified trees can save the environment by diminishing demand for wild trees' woods. Yet again, the lecturer deems the author's thesis invalid. The professor asserts that mere presence of these types may affect natural species owing to excessive competition for obtaining water, soil and stuff like that.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 149, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'organisms'' or 'organism's'?
Suggestion: organisms'; organism's
...s, which is a process used to change an organisms gene for the particular aims, can have ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 305, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...e article. On the contrary, finding the authors justification weak and lacking in terms...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 215, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...oods. Yet again, the lecturer deems the authors thesis invalid. The professor asserts t...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, first of all, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1542.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 295.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.22711864407 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14434120667 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66091978663 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 145.348785872 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.606779661017 0.540411800872 112% => OK
syllable_count: 469.8 419.366225166 112% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.8324367028 49.2860985944 134% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.5 110.228320801 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5833333333 21.698381199 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.41666666667 7.06452816374 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.292499502786 0.272083759551 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0908381851021 0.0996497079465 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0846544560705 0.0662205650399 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.164787260202 0.162205337803 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0322982487761 0.0443174109184 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.3589403974 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.35 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.38 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 63.6247240618 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.