The charts below show the proportions of British students at one university in England who were able to speak other languages in addition to English, in 2000 and 2010.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The pie charts demonstrate the proportions of British students at one university in England who had the ability to speak other languages surplus to English, in 2000 and 2010. In general, in both the years 2000 and 2010, the majority could speak Spanish.
More specifically, in 2000, while 30 percent of students were able to speak Spanish only, only 10 percent were allocated individually to German and two other languages. Furthermore, there were 20 percent of students who could not speak any other language other than English. And, the university's 15 percent of students had the ability to speak French.
Moreover, there was a reduction of French talking students from 2000 to 2010 by 5 precent. Even though, the percentage of students who were able to speak German remained stable, there was an increment in two other languages by 5 percent. Additionally, there was a decrease in the perecentage in no other languages.
Overall, even though there were a few increments and reductions in those two charts of two distinct years, there were no dramatic change.
- The chart below shows the percentage of households in owned and rented accommodation in England and Wales between 1918 and 2011 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
- The following appeared in a memo from the new vice president of Sartorian a company that manufactures men s clothing Five years ago at a time when we had difficulty obtaining reliable supplies of high quality wool fabric we discontinued production of our 79
- Governments officials should rely on their own judgment rather than unquestioningly carry out the will of the people they serve 58
- The diagram below shows how instant noodles are manufactured 78
- 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
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 139, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t years, there were no dramatic change.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, if, moreover, while, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 1.00243902439 200% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 1.0 5.60731707317 18% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 33.7804878049 80% => 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: 897.0 965.302439024 93% => OK
No of words: 176.0 196.424390244 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09659090909 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.64232057368 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79096438167 2.65546596893 105% => OK
Unique words: 94.0 106.607317073 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.534090909091 0.547539520022 98% => OK
syllable_count: 264.6 283.868780488 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.7800652902 43.030603864 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.6666666667 112.824112599 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5555555556 22.9334400587 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.88888888889 5.23603664747 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.366491410012 0.215688989381 170% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.1643661006 0.103423049105 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.123575477183 0.0843802449381 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.229195825714 0.15604864568 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.125919601938 0.0819641961636 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.2329268293 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 61.2550243902 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.3012195122 92% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 11.4140731707 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.35 8.06136585366 104% => OK
difficult_words: 42.0 40.7170731707 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => 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.