The diagrams below show the development of a small fishing village and its surrounding area into a large European tourist resort. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The two plans illustrate how a small coastal village in Europe grew into a large tourist center between 1974 and 2004.
It is clear that the main change for 2004 had involved the addition of numerous new constructions. The village would then be able to accommodate a considerably larger number of residents and tourists.
Over these thirty years, the local population increased dramatically from only 12000 to 80000, swelling to a possible 130000 during the tourist season. During this period, large numbers of high-rise hotels were built along the coastline on the both sides of the original village. The harbor and coastal woodland were removed by a sandy beach and a golf course for tourists. Similarly, the olive groves inland were replaced with fruit and vegetable farms for the tourist market.
The original village and these further inland on the hillside were developed with more homes for the locals and more shops for the tourist trade. A main road leading from the hills to the coast was constructed to cope with the increased traffic to the village.
- The diagrams below show the development of a small fishing village and its surrounding area into a large European tourist resort Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 85
- The charts below give information about the way in which water was used in differnt countries in 2000 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisos where relevant 79
- Modern societies need specialists in certain fields, but not in others. Some people therefore think that government should pay university fees for students who study subjects that are needed by society; those who choose to study less relevant subjects sh 78
- The diagrams below show the stages in the development of simple cooking equipment Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisos where relevant 85
- Scientists say that in the future humanity will speak the same language Do you think this is a positive or negative social development 52
Transition Words or Phrases used:
similarly, so, then, well
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 33.7804878049 74% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 896.0 965.302439024 93% => OK
No of words: 177.0 196.424390244 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.06214689266 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.64748333727 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50304803178 2.65546596893 94% => OK
Unique words: 111.0 106.607317073 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.627118644068 0.547539520022 115% => OK
syllable_count: 269.1 283.868780488 95% => 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
Interrogative: 0.0 0.114634146341 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.33902439024 161% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 19.5448202857 43.030603864 45% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 99.5555555556 112.824112599 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6666666667 22.9334400587 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.77777777778 5.23603664747 53% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.109284910207 0.215688989381 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0428275145686 0.103423049105 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0397524931311 0.0843802449381 47% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0747657898652 0.15604864568 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0424102507321 0.0819641961636 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.2329268293 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 61.2550243902 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.3012195122 92% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 11.4140731707 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.06136585366 104% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 40.7170731707 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.