The maps below show the changes that have taken place at the waterfront area of a town called Darwin between 2009 and 2014.
The maps depict the development of a town named Darwin from 2009 to 2014. The initial impression from the maps is that the town showed the complete obliteration of the industrial area to make room for more residential, recreational, and academic amenities. In addition, the town’s infrastructure was also renovated with the addition of a harbor and more footpaths.
In 2009, on the vast grassland stretching from the center to the southern part of the town was sited an industrial area. Over the next 5 years, this industrial zone became non-existent and was replaced by trees. To the southeast of the town, a new harbor was erected, and an additional footpath was established, leading from the harbor to the main road in the west of the town. This new footpath further divided the southern zone of the town into two distinct areas, the upper part of which had some new residential buildings and a new university one.
Regarding the area encircled by the footpaths, the former industrial area was converted into a swimming pool. The school and the convention center located in the vicinity of this area and the northern main road remained unchanged. The two swimming pools by the beach also remained in the same position over the given period.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-06 | maiphuonganh | 56 | view |
| 2023-07-20 | baoquyen1906 | 73 | view |
| 2023-07-05 | phamkhuyen | 78 | view |
| 2023-06-14 | ThHuong | 87 | view |
| 2023-03-18 | kieutrangkg1 | 78 | view |
- The process below shows the process of growing and making products from pineapple Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features 72
- The two maps below show an island before and after the construction of some tourist facilities Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 61
- The chart below shows the percentage of volunteers by organizations in 2008 and 2014 73
- The maps show the change of an office building between the present and the future Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 83
- The plans below show a public park when it first opened in 1920 and the samepark today Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 61
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, regarding, so, in addition
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 : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 33.7804878049 98% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 3.97073170732 151% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1041.0 965.302439024 108% => OK
No of words: 211.0 196.424390244 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.9336492891 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.81127787577 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80293191212 2.65546596893 106% => OK
Unique words: 110.0 106.607317073 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.521327014218 0.547539520022 95% => OK
syllable_count: 311.4 283.868780488 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.33902439024 184% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.5561527728 43.030603864 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.1 112.824112599 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1 22.9334400587 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.2 5.23603664747 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.09268292683 220% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.162874874558 0.215688989381 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0747556180559 0.103423049105 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0772258660152 0.0843802449381 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119111508995 0.15604864568 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0737039149273 0.0819641961636 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.2329268293 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 61.2550243902 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.3012195122 100% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 11.4140731707 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.06136585366 105% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 40.7170731707 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.4329268293 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.