The diagrams below show the changes that have taken place at Queen Mary Hospital since its construction in 1960.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The three different maps proffer information about how queen mary hospital change its structure from 1960 to 2000.
Overall, At the beginning of the period, The area was split into four equal sectors, and one part is covered by the hospital. At the end of the period, the hospital has enhanced its structure, and a new building was constructed.
Firstly, In 1960 Hospital deploy on the right side near the main road, and on the left side of the hospital shopping center was situated, and downside car park area. Moreover, The Remaining part of maps was covered by the farmland.
Subsequently, Shopping center removed, and replace by pharmacy and cancer center building in 1980. The Pharmacy building is joined with the hospital on left. Furthermore, Nursing school was constructed in the farmland area. Car park region was reduced by 50%, and nursing school was removed from its original place and transferred to the remaining 50% of the car park area in 2000. In Addition, Cancer center was burgeoned its part and covered remover region of the nursing school area.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-18 | MaganpreetSingh | 56 | view |
| 2019-11-12 | Dang Thi Truc Linh | 22 | view |
| 2019-10-23 | Shivani Jani | 56 | view |
| 2019-09-19 | Bao Linh Le | 67 | view |
| 2019-07-14 | SNEHA S.R | 11 | view |
- The charts summarise the weight measurements of people living in Charlestown in 1955 and 2015. 67
- A recent study indicates that children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal have lower levels of tooth decay than children living in suburban areas in the United States, despite the fact that people in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal re 37
- Respond to the instructions below and support your position with relevant reasoning drawn from your academic studies, reading, observation, and/or experience. 11
- Mass media and the internet have caused people’s attention spans to get shorter. However, the overall effect has been positive: while people are less able to focus on one thing, they more than make up for it with an enhanced ability to sort through lar 50
- The charts below show the percentage of their food budget the average family spent on restaurant meals in different years. The graph shows the average number of meals eaten in fast-food restaurants and sit-down restaurants per family. 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, if, moreover, 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: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 6.8 132% => OK
Relative clauses : 0.0 3.15609756098 0% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => 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: 896.0 965.302439024 93% => OK
No of words: 179.0 196.424390244 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.00558659218 4.92477711251 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.65774358864 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55915927879 2.65546596893 96% => OK
Unique words: 90.0 106.607317073 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.502793296089 0.547539520022 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 258.3 283.868780488 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 6.0 0.482926829268 1242% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 35.0029998714 43.030603864 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.6 112.824112599 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9 22.9334400587 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.4 5.23603664747 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
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 : 3.0 1.13902439024 263% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.133862137118 0.215688989381 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0586587725554 0.103423049105 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0610243583478 0.0843802449381 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.105027578524 0.15604864568 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0646969675727 0.0819641961636 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.2329268293 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 71.14 61.2550243902 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 10.3012195122 74% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.48 11.4140731707 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.45 8.06136585366 105% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 40.7170731707 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => 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.