The charts below show the main methods of transportation for people travelling to one university for work or study in 2004 and 2009.
Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.
The pie charts compare and contrast data on the changes in five types of transportation for people going to one university for work or study between 2004 and 2009.
Overall, the most popular transportation in university was seen in car in 2004, after the percentage of people using car to university decreased dramatically over this period shown. In addition, all other means of transportation observed an upward trend during this period.
The proportion of car users accounted for about half of all vehicles in 2004, after falling significantly to exactly 28% in 2009. By contrast, buses became the most preferred option which accounted for nearly half of all traffic in 2009, whereas just over 30% of people travelling by bus in 2004.
Similarly, train commuters and walkers showed minimal changes over a 5-year period from 2004 to 2009. The percentage of walkers climbed slightly from 4% to 6% at the same time. The figure for people using train for work or study in the university was the smallest during this period, at 3% in 2004 and 4% in 2009. By 2004, there had been about one-tenth of all modes of transportation in bicycle users, while the figure for those went up to 16% in 2009.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-02-04 | nguyenphthao99@gmail.com | 84 | view |
| 2019-07-28 | Szprawstyle | 82 | view |
- It is expected that there will be a higher proportion of older people than that of young people in many countries in the future Do you think it is a positive or negative development 67
- Environmental protection is the responsibility of politicians not individuals as individuals can do too little To what extent do you agree or disagree 67
- Many developing countries are currently expanding their tourist industries Why is this the case Is it a positive or negative development 73
- The table shows the percentage of literacy and employment in different countries in the 1990s and 2010s Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 92
- The chart below gives information on the percentage of British people giving money to charity by age range for the years 1990 and 2010 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 74
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, similarly, whereas, while, in addition
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 : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 33.7804878049 136% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 3.97073170732 151% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 955.0 965.302439024 99% => OK
No of words: 196.0 196.424390244 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87244897959 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.74165738677 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78428890049 2.65546596893 105% => OK
Unique words: 112.0 106.607317073 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.571428571429 0.547539520022 104% => OK
syllable_count: 279.0 283.868780488 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 28.5773803325 43.030603864 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.111111111 112.824112599 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7777777778 22.9334400587 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.66666666667 5.23603664747 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => 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: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.310720076908 0.215688989381 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.131951884802 0.103423049105 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.102706274073 0.0843802449381 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.205213685443 0.15604864568 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0922549876079 0.0819641961636 113% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.2329268293 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 61.2550243902 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.3012195122 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.97 11.4140731707 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.06136585366 101% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 40.7170731707 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.