The plans below show the layout of the ground floor of a museum in 1990 and 2010.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relavent.
The two plans depict how the ground floor of a museum was arranged in 1990 and 2010.
According to the two plans, there were some differences in the arrangement between the two points of years. It is noticeable that the archaeology gallery was removed and broken into two new areas, including the children’s interactive zone and the poster display area. Another significant alteration was that the statue next to the gift shop was moved to the center of the ground floor. Though the local history room still remained, the door attached to the poster display area was locked down while another door was more open. Between the gift shop and natural history room which still remained in 2010, a lift was constructed. The reception counter was delivered nearer to the entrance which was lengthened in 2010. Apart from the local history room and entrance, there were two areas staying the same, including the natural history room and the museum office.
In conclusion, a number of alterations were introduced in 2010.
- The diagram shows the stages involved in the process of making leather goods Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 61
- The maps below show an industrial area in the town of Norbiton and planned future development of the site Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevent 78
- The plans below show the layout of the ground floor of a museum in 1990 and 2010 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relavent 73
- The diagram below shows the process of recycling plastic bottles Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main feature and make comparisons where relevant 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, so, still, then, while, apart from, in conclusion
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 : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 20.0 33.7804878049 59% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 847.0 965.302439024 88% => OK
No of words: 170.0 196.424390244 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.98235294118 4.92477711251 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.61087313685 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5283239795 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 92.0 106.607317073 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.541176470588 0.547539520022 99% => OK
syllable_count: 252.9 283.868780488 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.4926829268 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.1150058982 43.030603864 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.1111111111 112.824112599 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8888888889 22.9334400587 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.88888888889 5.23603664747 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0911143089209 0.215688989381 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0528192578611 0.103423049105 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0789021524698 0.0843802449381 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119572514142 0.15604864568 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.104692872163 0.0819641961636 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.2329268293 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 61.2550243902 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.3012195122 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 11.4140731707 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.52 8.06136585366 106% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 40.7170731707 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.9970731707 84% => 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.