The chart gives data about the number of students giving good ratings in 2000, 2005 and 2010.
the table given privates information about the proportion of students giving best results from typical prospects of a university among 2000 and 2005, 2010.
As we can tell from table, the aspects of print resources were the highest ratings a period of 10 years. The lowest position could observe in a variety of modules offered between 2005 and 2010. The value of buildings/teaching amenities stayed constant in all the years compared to other categories.
According to the given information, less than half number of students gave the largest value of print resources in 2003. In 2010, the percentage of students achieved as significant as in 2000. The ratings of building/ teaching facilities remained relatively static over the 10 years. In 2000, just under a half students could earn the least value rather than other positions. The highest trend had showed in 2010 just over 88. In contrast, the proportion of people results almost doubled in both type of teaching quality and a range of modules recommended in all the years. In 2010, the value of teaching quality reached a significant proportion just over 69.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-02-09 | phạm khánh linh | 78 | view |
| 2024-02-09 | phạm khánh linh | 78 | view |
| 2024-02-09 | phạm khánh linh | 78 | view |
| 2024-02-09 | phạm khánh linh | 73 | view |
| 2024-02-09 | phạm khánh linh | 78 | view |
- The chart below gives information on the percentage of British people giving money to charity by age range for the years 1990 2010 78
- The diagram below show the changes that have taken place at west park secondary school since its construction in 1950 73
- Nowadays technological devices such as smart phones tablets bring more disadvantage than advantage Do you agree or disagree 89
- The pie charts below show the online shopping sales for retail sectors in New Zealand in 2003 and 2013 78
- The chart gives information about Southland s main exports in 2000 2021 and future projections for 2025 92
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
the table given privates information abou...
^^^
Line 1, column 16, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
the table given privates information about the proporti...
^^
Line 1, column 26, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
the table given privates information about the proportion of stud...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, so, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 1.0 7.0 14% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 1.00243902439 299% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 0.0 3.15609756098 0% => OK
Pronoun: 1.0 5.60731707317 18% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 3.97073170732 151% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 939.0 965.302439024 97% => OK
No of words: 184.0 196.424390244 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.10326086957 4.92477711251 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.68302321012 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79395931402 2.65546596893 105% => OK
Unique words: 101.0 106.607317073 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.548913043478 0.547539520022 100% => OK
syllable_count: 268.2 283.868780488 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.33902439024 207% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 8.94146341463 123% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.4926829268 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.6720365338 43.030603864 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.3636363636 112.824112599 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7272727273 22.9334400587 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.72727272727 5.23603664747 33% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.232730734282 0.215688989381 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0842676660597 0.103423049105 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0849226063987 0.0843802449381 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.169764111114 0.15604864568 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0929091259257 0.0819641961636 113% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.0 13.2329268293 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 61.2550243902 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 10.3012195122 82% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.0 11.4140731707 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.21 8.06136585366 102% => OK
difficult_words: 44.0 40.7170731707 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.4329268293 74% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.9970731707 76% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.