TPO 38: integrated writing task
The main topic of the reading passage and the lecture is about approaches to fight against P.ramorum, a special kind of fungus that infects trees and causes serious damages. The author proposes three approaches in order to protect forests from this fungus. However, the lecturer refutes all proposed avenue and believes they are not attainable and practical.
First of all the author refers to the humans' role in dispersing fungus spores. As there are abundant spores of P.ramorum on biking or hiking trail washing the shows and installing new bike scrubbers on bicycle trails would efficiently prevent the spread of spores. The lecturer, on the other hand, believes that human is not the main cause of spreading the spores. She declares that precipitations wash off the spores on a large scale and pour them into the water stream and carry them far distances and this is difficult to control. Hence, the proposed solution by the author would not be helpful.
Secondly, the author mentions using fungicides in order to protect trees. These chemicals enhance the natural defense of trees against fungus. The speaker, however, rebuts this idea by explaining that these chemicals should be directly injected to the trunk of a tree and it is efficient barely for a few months and after that, the injection should be repeated. Therefore, this method would be costly and not practical for thousands of trees on a large scale.
Finally, the reading claims that cutting and burning the diseased trees and surrounding vegetation, is efficient to stop the spread of the fungus. The surrounding vegetation may seemingly be healthy but there is always a possibility that they have been infected by fungus. The author, on the contrary, strongly contradicts this proposal by explaining that in some cases it is reasonable to sacrifice some of the healthy species in order to survive the whole ecosystem but in this case, this method would decimate some healthy rare species of vegetation which do not grow back easily. Therefore this method would impose great ecological damages instead of solving a problem.
- TPO 18: integrated writing task 80
- TPO 41: integrated writhing task 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?In order to be well-informed, a person must get information from many different news resources.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 73
- TPO 34: integrated writing task 71
- TPO 31: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Because the world is changing so quickly, people now are less happy or less satisfied with their lives than people were in the past. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 39, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'humans'' or 'human's'?
Suggestion: humans'; human's
... First of all the author refers to the humans role in dispersing fungus spores. As th...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 401, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...ome cases it is reasonable to sacrifice some of the healthy species in order to survive the...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 585, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...getation which do not grow back easily. Therefore this method would impose great ecologic...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, kind of, first of all, in some cases, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 7.30242825607 219% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 30.3222958057 148% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1760.0 1373.03311258 128% => OK
No of words: 344.0 270.72406181 127% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11627906977 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30665032142 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58670624845 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 145.348785872 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.537790697674 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 536.4 419.366225166 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.0821596138 49.2860985944 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.0 110.228320801 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.4375 7.06452816374 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => 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: 13.4 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.13 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 63.6247240618 152% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.