The chart below shows the different levels of post-school qualifications in Australia and the proportion of me and women who help them in 1999.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

Essay topics:

The chart below shows the different levels of post-school qualifications in Australia and the proportion of me and women who help them in 1999.

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The given bar chart illustrates proportions of male’s and female’s status of post-secondary education in 1999, Australia.

A number of women who received bachelor’s degree was rather close to that of men, performing slightly better than men in this stage. Also, a fraction of female students shared twice as big portion as that of male students who were qualified as a university graduate, 67 and 33 percentages in turn. However, as far as other qualifications are concerned, men were a vast majority. For example, occupied part by males accounts for a prominent share, namely a massive nine-tenths, which is 9 times larger than that by females. Postgraduate qualification was twice more popular amongst men than women. But when it came to master’s degree, the trend had changed a little bit: it had more preference compared to post-tertiary diploma amongst the latter, while the former still remained as the dominant fraction. For master’s degree, males occupy one-and-half times as many places as females, six and four out of ten respectively.

Overall, women were dominant in bachelor’s and undergraduate diplomas, while men were a majority in skilled vocational, postgraduate, and master’s degrees. In addition, it should be noted that the biggest and smallest difference was in skilled vocational and bachelor’s degree with 80 and 10 per cent in turn.

Votes
Average: 7.8 (1 vote)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2018-03-01 Sungbae 78 view
Essays by user Sungbae :

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 669, Rule ID: LITTLE_BIT[1]
Message: Reduce redundancy by using 'little' or 'bit'.
Suggestion: little; bit
...'s degree, the trend had changed a little bit: it had more preference compared to pos...
^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, second, so, still, while, for example, in addition

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 : 10.0 6.8 147% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 3.15609756098 253% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 21.0 33.7804878049 62% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 3.97073170732 201% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1186.0 965.302439024 123% => OK
No of words: 217.0 196.424390244 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.46543778802 4.92477711251 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.8380880478 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.4071914033 2.65546596893 128% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 106.607317073 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.640552995392 0.547539520022 117% => OK
syllable_count: 369.0 283.868780488 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.45097560976 117% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 3.36585365854 30% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.9852536224 43.030603864 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.6 112.824112599 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7 22.9334400587 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.4 5.23603664747 141% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0838844316542 0.215688989381 39% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0371640823924 0.103423049105 36% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0383269615258 0.0843802449381 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0733509053987 0.15604864568 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.046046330648 0.0819641961636 56% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.2329268293 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 61.2550243902 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.3012195122 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 11.4140731707 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.84 8.06136585366 122% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 40.7170731707 174% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.4329268293 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => 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.