The provided table depicts average IELST band score in General training for its participants who speak German, French, Indonesian and Malay in 2010. It is obvious from the data, that all groups of participants aimed almost same overall results.
In listening, German speaking individuals gained the highest score, when Malay speakers the lowest, 6.8 and 6.2 respectively. However, in Reading, Malay's achieved the best score from all groups (6.4), when French and Indonesian speakers aimed same score (6.1).
German and French speaking individuals gained average score with difference only 0.1 point, 6.6 and 6.5 respectively. German speakers have excel also in speaking, when their average score was 6.9, followed by Indonesian (6.7) and French and Malay with same result (6.6).
Overall score was the highest for group of German speaking participants (6.7), the worst result got Indonesian speaking students (6.3).
To sum up, people who took IELST General training whoms German is native language, achieved the highest score, in contrast to individuals with mother language Indonesian, who gained the lowest score in all compared language groups.
- the pie charts show the online shopping sales for retail sectors in Canada in 2005 and 2010. 56
- The Level of Air Pollution in Five Countries 73
- The maps below show the village of Stokeford in 1930 and in 2010. 78
- Televised talent shows have become popular in many societies today.Are these shows a good method of finding talented people, or are they just entertainment? 91
- The use of mobile phone is as antisocial as smoking. Smoking is banned in certain places so mobile phone should be banned like smoking. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 139, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'excelled'.
Suggestion: excelled
... 6.5 respectively. German speakers have excel also in speaking, when their average sc...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, in contrast, in general, in contrast to, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 18.0 33.7804878049 53% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 971.0 965.302439024 101% => OK
No of words: 176.0 196.424390244 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.51704545455 4.92477711251 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.64232057368 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55319819496 2.65546596893 96% => OK
Unique words: 97.0 106.607317073 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.551136363636 0.547539520022 101% => OK
syllable_count: 274.5 283.868780488 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 5.0 8.94146341463 56% => 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: 35.0 22.4926829268 156% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 152.917494094 43.030603864 355% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 194.2 112.824112599 172% => OK
Words per sentence: 35.2 22.9334400587 153% => OK
Discourse Markers: 14.6 5.23603664747 279% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 3.83414634146 130% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.232110138309 0.215688989381 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.138695181014 0.103423049105 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.072868035138 0.0843802449381 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.14259938032 0.15604864568 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0520654072889 0.0819641961636 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 22.2 13.2329268293 168% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.95 61.2550243902 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.9 10.3012195122 164% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.33 11.4140731707 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.87 8.06136585366 110% => OK
difficult_words: 39.0 40.7170731707 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 16.0 10.9970731707 145% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.