Protection of Forest Through International Fund
Both the reading passage and lecture discuss about the efficacy of the implementation of international fund program in attempt to prevent the destruction of forest ecosystem, which has a notorious effect on the surrounding environment. While the author mentions three specific reasons for the advantages of such implementation, the lecturer challenges each proposition made by author for several reasons which will be discussed in the following paragraphs.
The author, in the reading, begins by mentioning that appropriating funds to the various authorities--specifically, farmers, governments, and land owners, will ensure that they hinder the intrusions in their land by benefit seeking parties; however, the lecturer refutes the author arguments mentioning about the effect of agriculture in deforestation. He says that due to increasing demand of the population, the farmers are compelled to employ herbicides in the agricultural land. Consequently, thus added harmful pesticides research to the water sources through run-off resulting in water pollution--a major cause of deforestation. Evidently, it falsifies the authors remark.
The writer further asserts that dissemination of the funds to the villagers and local residents will help to avert them form destructive activities of deforestation: living standards are improved. The speaker questions the claim made by author arguing that there is not possibility that the allocated funds will reach to the residents as they may not be the owner of the forests. Additionally, it is also not guaranteed that individuals will invest such funds in the doing best for the forest ecosystem which jeopardizes the writers statement.
The reading article, finally, posits that developed of the protect forest areas will reduce the destruction caused by humans for their advantages. Further, it also maintains the biodiversity in the forest ecosystem. As opposed to the article's opinion, the author asserts that forest owners may use such funds for the plantation of the commercial trees only resulting in no biodiversity.
To summarize, the author and speaker holds opposite views on the favorability of implementation of international fund program to save the forest destruction which will be difficult for both of them in finding a common ground.
- Migration of Dinosaurs to South 73
- Protection of Forest Through International Fund 80
- Problems in Protecting Wild Tauna 52
- Cure of Malaria 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement After completing high school students should take at least a year off to work or travel before they begin studying at a university Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 166, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...destructive activities of deforestation: living standards are improved. The speak...
^^
Line 5, column 527, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
... forest ecosystem which jeopardizes the writers statement. The reading article, fina...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 56, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...icle, finally, posits that developed of the protect forest areas will reduce the destructio...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 235, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'articles'' or 'article's'?
Suggestion: articles'; article's
...the forest ecosystem. As opposed to the articles opinion, the author asserts that forest...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, finally, however, if, may, so, thus, while
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 : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 30.3222958057 162% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 5.01324503311 319% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1963.0 1373.03311258 143% => OK
No of words: 346.0 270.72406181 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.67341040462 5.08290768461 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.36202209328 2.5805825403 130% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 145.348785872 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.537572254335 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 595.8 419.366225166 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 21.2450331126 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 74.7092985507 49.2860985944 152% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.0 110.228320801 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.6153846154 21.698381199 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.76923076923 7.06452816374 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.237886576187 0.272083759551 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0798089695896 0.0996497079465 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0609574846141 0.0662205650399 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13240515013 0.162205337803 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0521607318912 0.0443174109184 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.6 13.3589403974 139% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 53.8541721854 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.0289183223 132% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.9 12.2367328918 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.36 8.42419426049 123% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 63.6247240618 187% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 10.7273730684 186% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.498013245 118% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.