The maps below show changes to the ground floor plan of a university department in 2000 and 2015.
The given pictures illustrate the refurbishment of a university department for the ground floor in the period of 15 years - from 2002 to 2015.
Firstly, as can be seen from the maps, seminar rooms area experienced a considerable enlargement as there were two more rooms being added to the north side of a department. All of these rooms were still divided by a corridor in the middle of a building. Besides, the old library was made room for the expansion of the office in 2015.
A more detailed look at the diagrams reveals changes in the east side. After 15 years, trees were cut down to make space for an additional building. This contained a relocated library and one IT Center. These two functional areas are separated by a corridor.
Lastly, the outside area of the university department almost remained unchanged. The road and man entrance were located at the same position after 15 years. However, there was an updated car park next to the main entrance.
Overall, there was a significant enhancement to the ground floor plan of the university department in 2000 and 2015, including a modification of buildings and functional areas as well as the destruction of a natural area.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-10-30 | myduyen282 | 78 | view |
| 2022-07-18 | kevann | 78 | view |
| 2022-01-10 | nguyendangquang.aspect | 78 | view |
| 2021-11-28 | immtee | 61 | view |
| 2021-10-19 | suaadma34 | view |
- Some people store personal and private information online including banking contacts and addresses Is it a positive or negative trend 84
- The first graph shows the number of train passengers from 2000 to 2009 the second compares the percentage of trains running on time and target in the period 67
- Cyclists and car drivers sharing the same road might cause some problems What are the problems What could be done to solve those problems 73
- Some people think that schools should choose students according to their academic abilities while others think it is better to have students of different abilities studying together Discuss both views and state your own opinion 78
- Some people think that schools should choose students according to their academic abilities while others think it is better to have students of different abilities studying together Discuss both views and state your own opinion 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, look, still, well, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 7.0 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 0.0 3.15609756098 0% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 33.7804878049 89% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 3.97073170732 302% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 993.0 965.302439024 103% => OK
No of words: 203.0 196.424390244 103% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89162561576 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.77462671648 3.73543355544 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.847372606 2.65546596893 107% => OK
Unique words: 119.0 106.607317073 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.586206896552 0.547539520022 107% => OK
syllable_count: 309.6 283.868780488 109% => 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: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 3.36585365854 30% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 8.94146341463 134% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.4926829268 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 50.2186192783 43.030603864 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.75 112.824112599 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.9166666667 22.9334400587 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 5.23603664747 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 3.83414634146 130% => Less 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 : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.09268292683 244% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.201047630498 0.215688989381 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.064122159805 0.103423049105 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100165080612 0.0843802449381 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130787507806 0.15604864568 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.11758664621 0.0819641961636 143% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.1 13.2329268293 76% => 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: 10.79 11.4140731707 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.32 8.06136585366 103% => OK
difficult_words: 50.0 40.7170731707 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.9970731707 76% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.