tpo23
Both author and lecturer offer two opposing views on the hypotheses of explanation for the yellow cedar decrement. While the reading passage lists some factors as the plausible reason for the phenomenon, the professor counters these specific points, and presents clues to call in the question for the information in the text.
First of all, the article mentions to the surmise of insect parasites, especially the cedar bark beetle is one of the possible factors of this event. However, the instructor refutes this surmise. As he asserts, the healthy cedar releases a specific substance which is toxic; in addition, it attacks the insects. As a result, whenever, the yellow cedar is defeated by the insects, the insects will be contaminated by this substance, and they will die. That is how the lecturer casts doubt the truth of this surmise.
Next, meanwhile, the passage names the brown bears and their eating habits as another feasible hypothesis, the professor casts doubt on the accuracy of this claim. As he states, although the eating habit of brown bear can damage the trees, it cannot lead to this huge population decreasing. Moreover, inasmuch as the decline occurs in the both mainland and island; however, the island is not the habitat of the brown bears. Consequently, the brown bear does not lead to this decrement.
Finally, the text posits the gradual alteration of climate, which makes the roots of the trees be sensitive. On the other hand, the lecturer challenges the validity of this presumes. Based on his evidence, even though the change of weather makes them sensitive, as she points out the decrease of trees in the hot, lower elevation is more than the cold, high spots. Hence, if the cold weather leads to this phenomenon, the majority of decrement should happen in the high elevation; however, the actual records are contradicted with this assumption.
Discourse Markers used:
['consequently', 'finally', 'first', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'moreover', 'so', 'while', 'in addition', 'as a result', 'first of all', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.25348189415 0.261695866417 97% => OK
Verbs: 0.111420612813 0.158904122519 70% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0807799442897 0.0723426182421 112% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0362116991643 0.0435111971325 83% => OK
Pronouns: 0.025069637883 0.0277247811725 90% => OK
Prepositions: 0.119777158774 0.128828473217 93% => OK
Participles: 0.016713091922 0.0370669169778 45% => Some participles wanted.
Conjunctions: 2.61994547809 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0139275766017 0.0208969081088 67% => OK
Particles: 0.00278551532033 0.00154638098197 180% => OK
Determiners: 0.183844011142 0.128158765124 143% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0139275766017 0.0158828679856 88% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.008356545961 0.0114777025283 73% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1885.0 1645.83664459 115% => OK
No of words: 311.0 271.125827815 115% => OK
Chars per words: 6.06109324759 6.08160592843 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19942759058 4.04852973271 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.369774919614 0.374372842146 99% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.282958199357 0.287516216867 98% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.212218649518 0.187439937562 113% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.112540192926 0.113142543107 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61994547809 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 145.348785872 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565916398714 0.539623497131 105% => OK
Word variations: 60.6934666637 53.8517498576 113% => OK
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0529801325 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.7333333333 21.7502111507 95% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.3453505872 49.3711431718 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.666666667 132.220823453 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7333333333 21.7502111507 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.866666666667 0.878197800319 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.39072847682 0% => OK
Readability: 49.029153269 50.5018328374 97% => OK
Elegance: 2.25806451613 1.90840788429 118% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.744874690252 0.549887131256 135% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.157233987949 0.142949733639 110% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0634687024502 0.0787303798458 81% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.688766051719 0.631733273073 109% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.108337621774 0.139662658121 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.402241748467 0.266732575781 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100101880858 0.103435571967 97% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.546885992885 0.414875509568 132% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0372785334531 0.0530846634433 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.597529597557 0.40443939384 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0281529744553 0.0528353158467 53% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.26048565121 164% => OK
Positive topic words: 1.0 3.49668874172 29% => More positive topic words wanted.
Negative topic words: 7.0 3.62251655629 193% => OK
Neutral topic words: 7.0 3.1766004415 220% => OK
Total topic words: 15.0 10.2958057395 146% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.