The chart below shows waste collection by a recycling centre from 2011 to 2015

The graph gives information about the amount of waste collected by a recycling centre between 2011 and 2015.

It is clear that although the total amount of waste decreased during the first half of the period, it increased starkly again during the remaining years. In addition, there was an upward trend in the figure for the collection of paper and glass while that of tins and garden saw an opposite trend.

During the former half of the period, most categories increased gradually while constantly taking the highest stage was the paper trash. Despite of the center position, the waste of paper did not increase as popular as that of glass and ended up this given time of period by losing their 17 tons of waste while the glass trash dropped back their initial level with 48 tons. There was the slightly downward trend in tins and garden, with the former falling from 35 tons to 34 tons of waste, while the latter had the same change with falling from 32 tons to 31 tons.

The picture was very different from 2013 to 2015, as evidenced by the increase in the gap between all type of waste collection. The amount of paper collected by recycling centre witnessed a significant increase of 70 tons of waste in 2015, followed by glass, climbing to 52 tons of waste in the end of period. On the other hand, tins and garden also witnessed the same pattern, albeit in a smaller number, which stood at 33 tons and 27 tons in 2014 before soaring to 39 tons and 35 tons of waste in 2015.

Votes
Average: 7.3 (1 vote)

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The graph gives information about the am...
^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ecycling centre between 2011 and 2015. It is clear that although the total am...
^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tins and garden saw an opposite trend. During the former half of the period, ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...th falling from 32 tons to 31 tons. The picture was very different from 2013...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, so, while, in addition, on the other hand

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 : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 56.0 33.7804878049 166% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1222.0 965.302439024 127% => OK
No of words: 269.0 196.424390244 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.54275092937 4.92477711251 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0498419064 3.73543355544 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.24786289733 2.65546596893 85% => OK
Unique words: 137.0 106.607317073 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509293680297 0.547539520022 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 352.8 283.868780488 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 22.4926829268 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 37.8489525598 43.030603864 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.777777778 112.824112599 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.8888888889 22.9334400587 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.44444444444 5.23603664747 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 1.69756097561 236% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 1.13902439024 439% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.09268292683 24% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.216462188232 0.215688989381 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112137711849 0.103423049105 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.117783968334 0.0843802449381 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.176976903387 0.15604864568 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.13307198846 0.0819641961636 162% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.2329268293 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 67.42 61.2550243902 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.64 11.4140731707 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.78 8.06136585366 97% => OK
difficult_words: 46.0 40.7170731707 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.9970731707 124% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => 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.