The line graph below shows changes in the amount and type of fast food consumed by Australian teenagers from 1975 to 2000.
The line graph compares the fast food consumption of teenagers in Australia between 1975 and 2000, a period of 25 years. Overall, the consumption of fish and chips declined over the period, whereas the amount of pizza and hamburgers that were eaten increased.
In 1975, the most popular fast food with Australian teenagers was fish and chips, being eaten 100 times a year. This was far higher than Pizza and hamburgers, which were consumed approximately 5 times a year. However, apart from a brief rise again from 1980 to 1985, the consumption of fish and chips gradually declined over the 25 year timescale to finish at just under 40.
In sharp contrast to this, teenagers ate the other two fast foods at much higher levels. Pizza consumption increased gradually until it overtook the consumption of fish and chips in 1990. It then levelled off from 1995 to 2000. The biggest rise was seen in hamburgers as the occasions they were eaten increased sharply throughout the 1970’s and 1980’s, exceeding that of fish and chips in 1985. It finished at the same level that fish and chips began, with consumption at 100 times a year.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-14 | Sheetal Bataniya | 73 | view |
| 2019-11-28 | asdasdasd | 78 | view |
| 2019-10-04 | Ashley Cheung | 73 | view |
| 2019-10-02 | iamkristinjoi | 73 | view |
| 2019-09-19 | Bao Trang | 73 | view |
- Nuclear energy is a better choice for meeting increasing demand, agree or disagree? 67
- The graph below shows the pollution levels in London between 1600 and 2000.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.Write at least 150 words. 11
- You should spend about 20 minutes on this task.The graph below shows female unemployment rates in each country of the United Kingdom in 2013 and 2014.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where releva 56
- The line graph below shows the household recycling rates in three different countries between 2005 and 2015.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 73
- The graph below shows the population for India and China since the year 2000 and predicts population growth until 2050 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, then, whereas, apart from
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 6.8 147% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 9.0 5.60731707317 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 33.0 33.7804878049 98% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 3.97073170732 151% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 949.0 965.302439024 98% => OK
No of words: 194.0 196.424390244 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89175257732 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.73207559907 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62684883194 2.65546596893 99% => OK
Unique words: 104.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536082474227 0.547539520022 98% => OK
syllable_count: 261.0 283.868780488 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.8477211996 43.030603864 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.9 112.824112599 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4 22.9334400587 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.4 5.23603664747 65% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.194009264482 0.215688989381 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0887264905533 0.103423049105 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0987091860056 0.0843802449381 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.152717253133 0.15604864568 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0630625341908 0.0819641961636 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.2329268293 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 77.57 61.2550243902 127% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 10.3012195122 70% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.08 11.4140731707 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.59 8.06136585366 94% => OK
difficult_words: 37.0 40.7170731707 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.4329268293 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.0658536585 72% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.