The table shows the amount of money given to developing countries by the USA, EU countries and other countries from 2006 to 2010. (Figures are in millions of dollars)
The table illustrates how much money was donated to developing countries in the period 2006-2010, by US and EU charities, to support technological development.
Overall, it is clear that total aid increased during this period. US aid was considerably higher than that from other donor countries.
There was a significant increase in the total aid given, from $15.7 billion in 2006 to $24.3 billion in 2009, rising sharply to $30 billion in the following year. US charities provided most of this money, with a rise in aid each year from $9.7 billion in 2006 to reach a peak of $22.7 billion in 2010.
However, contributions from other charities also increased. In EU countries, charities gave $3.3 billion in 2006 and then aid grew slowly to $3.8 billion in 2008, followed by a slight fall in the next year, before rising again to reach $4 billion at the end of the period. Charities in other countries also provided increasing aid. Despite a similar fluctuation to EU charities in the amount given each year, donations went up from $2.7 billion in 2006 to reach $3.3 billion in 2010.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-07-24 | angela_nancy | 73 | view |
- The bar chart below shows the top ten countries for the production and consumption ofelectricity in 2014. 67
- The table shows the amount of money given to developing countries by the USA, EU countries and other countries from 2006 to 2010. (Figures are in millions of dollars) 73
- The table shows the amount of money given in aid of technology of developing countries by charaties in the US, EU and other countries from 2006 to 2010Đề thi IELTS Writing task 1 ngày 10/03/2018 67
- The table shows the amount of money given to developing countries by the USA EU countries and other countries from 2006 to 2010 Figures are in millions of dollars luyen thi ielts 67
- The graph below shows the average number of UK commuters travelling each day by car, bus ortrain between 1970 and 2030. 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 231, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... next year, before rising again to reach billion at the end of the period. Charit...
^^
Line 4, column 233, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a billion'.
Suggestion: a billion
...ext year, before rising again to reach billion at the end of the period. Charities in ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, then
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 : 2.0 6.8 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 33.7804878049 121% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 881.0 965.302439024 91% => OK
No of words: 185.0 196.424390244 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.76216216216 4.92477711251 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.68801715136 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76316161111 2.65546596893 104% => OK
Unique words: 100.0 106.607317073 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.540540540541 0.547539520022 99% => OK
syllable_count: 248.4 283.868780488 88% => 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: 1.0 4.33902439024 23% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.0094958091 43.030603864 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.8888888889 112.824112599 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5555555556 22.9334400587 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.55555555556 5.23603664747 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 3.70975609756 216% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.09268292683 24% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.226613921027 0.215688989381 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112229699503 0.103423049105 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0838868602247 0.0843802449381 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.155646947886 0.15604864568 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0924848802442 0.0819641961636 113% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.2329268293 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 76.56 61.2550243902 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 10.3012195122 74% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.33 11.4140731707 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.7 8.06136585366 96% => OK
difficult_words: 36.0 40.7170731707 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => 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.