the table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999

Essay topics:

the table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999

The table illustrates the 7 different types of families are living in poverty in Australia in 1999. The figures measured in percentage. It is immediately apparent that Sole parents and single with no children are living in poverty, at 21% and 19%.

To begin with, there is large number of people from each household type living in the poverty. Majority of the people from sole parents and single with no children are living in poverty, at 21%, 19 % respectively. On the other side, the people who are single aged, aged couple and couple with no children are living in less poverty approximately at 6%, 4% and 7% respectively, which is half of the above mentioned categories.

Moreover, Couple with the children and all household have substantially similar figures at 11%. It is very clear that the families that have less number of the people in the family had less poverty as compare to other categories.

In conclusion, sole parents were living in extreme poverty while the aged people were living in least poverty.

Votes
Average: 7.4 (85 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

The table illustrates the 7 different types of families are living in poverty in Australia in 1999.
The table illustrates 7 different types of families which are living in poverty in Australia in 1999.

he figures measured in percentage.
he figures are measured in percentage.

there is large number of people
there is a large number of people

...respectively, which is half of the above mentioned categories.
Description: 'which' refers to what here?

Sentence: It is very clear that the families that have less number of the people in the family had less poverty as compare to other categories.
Description: A conjunction, subordinating is not usually followed by a verb, base: uninflected present, imperative or infinitive
Suggestion: Refer to as and compare

flaws:
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2

Read a good grammar book.

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 5.0 out of 9
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 9 10
No. of Words: 173 200
No. of Characters: 814 1000
No. of Different Words: 81 100
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.627 4.0
Average Word Length: 4.705 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.623 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 62 60
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 41 50
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 25 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 15 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.222 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.107 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.333 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.476 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.692 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.123 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 4