This line graph shows the percentage of people in two different cities without health insurance from 1981 to 2005. The cities shown are Boston and Seattle.
In 1981, both Boston and Seattle had exactly the same percentage of people who were uninsured, at just a little over 20%. A few years later both cities sees an increase in that percentage. However, Seattle sees a steeper rise. Boston's percentage of the uninsured starts falling soon afterwards but then starts rising again around the year 1990. Around 1994, when it is higher than Seattle's, Boston's percentage starts decreasing quite dramatically until 2005. After Seattle's initial rise in the percentage of the uninsured, the graph shows that the percentage went downward until the year 2005.
The percentage of people in both cities without health insurance starts off the same in 1981 and eventually ended at a percentage below that level in 2005. Boston's percentage in 2005 is quite a bit lower than in 1981 but Seattle's percentage is only a tiny bit lower.
- the graph below shows changes in the distribution of average household income between 1965 and 2015 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 93
- The table below gives information on consumer spending on different items in five different countries in 2002. 78
- This chart below shows the percentage of the city's population that does not have any sort of health insurance. there is information from 1981 to 2005 for two cities 73
- Q: Without capital punishment our lives are less secure and crimes of violence increase. Capital punishment is essential to control violence in society. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 73
- The Graph below shows average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person in the United Kindom, Sweden, Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, so, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 33.7804878049 83% => 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: 851.0 965.302439024 88% => OK
No of words: 170.0 196.424390244 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.00588235294 4.92477711251 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.61087313685 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52627027899 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 91.0 106.607317073 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.535294117647 0.547539520022 98% => OK
syllable_count: 249.3 283.868780488 88% => 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: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.5447732714 43.030603864 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.1 112.824112599 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 22.9334400587 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.6 5.23603664747 50% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.263568217718 0.215688989381 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117658525012 0.103423049105 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.106409883592 0.0843802449381 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.240764589559 0.15604864568 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.107329783689 0.0819641961636 131% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 13.2329268293 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 61.2550243902 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.3012195122 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.48 11.4140731707 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.17 8.06136585366 89% => OK
difficult_words: 29.0 40.7170731707 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.4329268293 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => 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.