The charts show school expenditure and the proportion of students who gained higher education diplomas and degrees in Singapore from 2000 to 2012.
The bar chart illustrates the total spending on boys and girls schools in Singapore between 2000 and 2012. The pie chart compares the percentage of students in higher education in Singapore who gained diplomas and degrees in 2000 and 2012.
Overall, it is clear that total school expenditure rose over the period. In addition, a higher proportion of students gained diplomas compared with those who were awarded degrees.
In Singapore, $9 million was spent on boys schools in 2000. This figure rose steadily to $20 million and $26 million in 2004 and 2008, respectively. In 2012, spending reached a peak of $33 million. In contrast, the expenditure on girls schools was lower. From a total of $7 million in 2000, however, spending on schools for girls also saw a steady increase, reaching a peak of $20 million at the end of the period.
There was an increase in the proportion of higher education students in Singapore who gained degrees. The percentage rose from 27% in 2000 to 32% in 2012, whereas the proportion of those who graduated with diplomas decreased from 73% in 2000 to 68% in 2012.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 14, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...o were awarded degrees. In Singapore, million was spent on boys schools in 200...
^^
Line 5, column 16, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a million'.
Suggestion: a million
...were awarded degrees. In Singapore, million was spent on boys schools in 2000. This...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 263, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...girls schools was lower. From a total of million in 2000, however, spending on sc...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, so, whereas, in addition, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 13.1623246493 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 7.85571142285 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 5.0 24.0651302605 21% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 905.0 1615.20841683 56% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 186.0 315.596192385 59% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.86559139785 5.12529762239 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.69299088775 4.20363070211 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6857246924 2.80592935109 96% => OK
Unique words: 88.0 176.041082164 50% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.47311827957 0.561755894193 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 253.8 506.74238477 50% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.60771543086 87% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.6880979192 49.4020404114 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.2727272727 106.682146367 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.9090909091 20.7667163134 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.72727272727 7.06120827912 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.53053980567 0.244688304435 217% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.200296371996 0.084324248473 238% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.161294425548 0.0667982634062 241% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.353230073811 0.151304729494 233% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.165269950517 0.056905535591 290% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.0 13.0946893788 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 72.16 50.2224549098 144% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 11.3001002004 64% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.67 12.4159519038 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.4 8.58950901804 86% => OK
difficult_words: 35.0 78.4519038076 45% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 9.78957915832 66% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 10.7795591182 65% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.