The bar chart below shows the percentage participation of men in senior development in three companies between 1980 and the year 2010. Summarise the information by selecting and report in the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The bar graph gives information about proportion of males who participated in senior development in thrice of companies from 1980 till 2010.
To begin with, it is clear by analysing histogram that, company of apple had higher count of proportion regards men (15%) during first year, in comparison to other two which included Microsoft (8%) and IBM (1%). Yet during 1985, apple company was decreased with 2% and Microsoft was increased with same count. However, IBM has same proportion of participants likewise previous year (1%). On other hand, in era of 1990, all thrice of companies had similar percentage of participated men which was around 12% respectively.
On contrast, in 1995, participation of males in IBM industry was drastically increased with proportion of 25%. Similarly, apple company had shown increase in participation with 12%. Likewise, take part in Microsoft was also maximize with little change of 12%. Furthermore in second last year, once more, IBM shown higher number with increase of 32% while apple company was lowered with 18%. Yet, proportion of participants in Microsoft was increased with addition of 2%. Lastly in 2010, proportion of men in IBM industry was significantly increased upto more than half of total (62%). Similarly, Microsoft was also represented rapid change with increase of 45%. Whereas, apple company was lower than other two, yet expand upto 25%.
Overall, in beginning, IBM was on lower count, however with passing of eras it was represented rapid alters with higher proportion in comparison to other twice of agencies in which men took part for senior development.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 224, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'maximized'.
Suggestion: maximized
...kewise, take part in Microsoft was also maximize with little change of 12%. Furthermore ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 260, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Furthermore,
...lso maximize with little change of 12%. Furthermore in second last year, once more, IBM sho...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, however, if, lastly, likewise, second, similarly, so, whereas, while, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 7.0 186% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 33.7804878049 175% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 3.97073170732 327% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1350.0 965.302439024 140% => OK
No of words: 259.0 196.424390244 132% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21235521236 4.92477711251 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01166760082 3.73543355544 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84864645073 2.65546596893 107% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 106.607317073 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.517374517375 0.547539520022 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 405.0 283.868780488 143% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.33902439024 23% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 8.94146341463 157% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.4926829268 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.4323624826 43.030603864 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.4285714286 112.824112599 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5 22.9334400587 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.78571428571 5.23603664747 149% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 3.70975609756 270% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => 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: 0.131269634029 0.215688989381 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0622295625467 0.103423049105 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0589174544371 0.0843802449381 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120234401787 0.15604864568 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0761013821442 0.0819641961636 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.2329268293 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 61.2550243902 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.3012195122 100% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 11.4140731707 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.7 8.06136585366 96% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 40.7170731707 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.9970731707 84% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => 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.