The bar chart below shows the number of houses built per year in two cities, Derby and Nottingham, Between 2000 and 2009. Write a report for a university lecturer describing the information shown below.
The given pictorial representation is a bar graph depicting the number of houses built in the cities of Derby and Nottingham within the years 2000 to 2009.
Referring to the graph even superficially reveals an overall rise in the number of houses in both the cities over the span of 10 years. In Nottingham, the decade began with an approximate 50 houses in 2000 which suddenly dropped to its half in 2002. The numbers once again started to improve before drastically declining yet again in 2006. By the end of the decade, Nottingham showed about 250 houses built in the city; a starking upgrade to its number from the previous year.
The population of houses in Derby were comparatively less erratic than that we observed in Nottingham. At the start of the 21st century, the city comprised less than 50 houses. As the years progressed, it showed a steady and sturdy increase in the numbers. However, the number of houses became slightly stagnant between 2003 and 2007, neither developing nor deteriorating. A surge is noted in 2008, almost reaching 300 houses; a striking contrast to one of Nottingham’s worst years of development.
Derby continued to improve and by the end of 2009, the city managed to build almost 350 houses; a seven-fold increase from its starting year. In comparison, Nottingham fails to meet the standards set by Derby; despite showing five times the growth of houses as seen in 2000.
- In some countries people spend long hours at work Why does this happen Is it positive or negative development 84
- The bar chart below shows the number of houses built per year in two cities Derby and Nottingham Between 2000 and 2009 Write a report for a university lecturer describing the information shown below 73
- The bar chart below shows the total number of minutes in billions of telephone calls in Australia divided into three categories from 2001 2008 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- In some countries only a few young people go to classical music concerts or play classical music Why Should young people be encouraged to attend and learn more 56
- The pie charts below show the percentage of housing owned and rented in the UK in 1991 and 2007 Summarize the information by describing the main features of the charts and making comparisons where appropriate 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 33.7804878049 142% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1180.0 965.302439024 122% => OK
No of words: 240.0 196.424390244 122% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91666666667 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93597934253 3.73543355544 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78816945125 2.65546596893 105% => OK
Unique words: 137.0 106.607317073 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.570833333333 0.547539520022 104% => OK
syllable_count: 344.7 283.868780488 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 11.0 4.33902439024 254% => 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: 12.0 8.94146341463 134% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 24.8573709167 43.030603864 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 98.3333333333 112.824112599 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 22.9334400587 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.916666666667 5.23603664747 18% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 3.70975609756 189% => 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: 0.289939917232 0.215688989381 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104274751719 0.103423049105 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0754986464486 0.0843802449381 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.200631996121 0.15604864568 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0715910747103 0.0819641961636 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.2329268293 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 61.2550243902 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.3012195122 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 11.4140731707 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.06136585366 108% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 40.7170731707 152% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => 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.