The chart shows the results of surveys in one African country asking teenagers the main reasons for using their phones between 2016 and 2019.
The pie chart compares how to use the phone of teenagers in one African nation from 2016 to 2019.
Overall it is clear that the number of social networks was highest. By contrast, the percentage of phone calls was lowest, during the period show.
As can be seen that the number of social networks accounted for 50% in 2016 after that Social networks was decreased significantly to around 48% in 2017. Besides, the digital camera was equal to 15% in both years 2016 and 2017. It is noticeable that the email saw a significant fall in use email by 25% and 24% over the whole 1-year-period.
Turning to the remaining, between 2018 and 2019, we can see that The largest amount of social networks made up half throughout the period show, while the number of digital cameras accounted for a very small proportion by 11% and 5%. In addition, the email dropped constantly at near;y 20% in 2018, at which point the figure started to fall sharply to 19% in 2019.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-21 | Phuong1810 | 78 | view |
| 2023-08-05 | Phạm Gia Bảo | view | |
| 2023-08-02 | taman150507 | 73 | view |
| 2023-06-25 | nguyendangquang.aspect | 84 | view |
| 2023-06-21 | drikbest | 67 | view |
- Some people believe that children should be banned from using their phones during the school day Others believe that children should be allowed to use their phones 11
- The chart below gives information about the amount of time children spend with their parents 61
- The line graph shows the oil production and consumption in China between 1982 and 2006
- The table gives information about five types of vehicles registered in Australia in 2010 2012 and 2014
- The percentage of men and women aged 60 64 who were employed in four countries in 1970 and 2000 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, if, so, while, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 1.00243902439 200% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 33.7804878049 104% => 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: 785.0 965.302439024 81% => OK
No of words: 171.0 196.424390244 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.59064327485 4.92477711251 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.61617157096 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47587449519 2.65546596893 93% => OK
Unique words: 101.0 106.607317073 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.590643274854 0.547539520022 108% => OK
syllable_count: 219.6 283.868780488 77% => 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: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.3170293372 43.030603864 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.125 112.824112599 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.375 22.9334400587 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.375 5.23603664747 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => 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: 0.196446219605 0.215688989381 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0870619882513 0.103423049105 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107114854643 0.0843802449381 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.144384359777 0.15604864568 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.124570326711 0.0819641961636 152% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.2329268293 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 75.54 61.2550243902 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 10.3012195122 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.34 11.4140731707 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.91 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 35.0 40.7170731707 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.4329268293 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.0658536585 72% => 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.