The following graphs depict the reliability of print and non print academic materials as voiced by undergraduates and postgraduates at 3 different British universities Summarise the information by selecting reporting the main features and make comparisons
The provided graphics demonstrate the credibility of two distinct academic document categories, hard materials and computerized resources, was surveyed by Bachelors and Undergraduates of various British educational institutions.
Looking at the charts, it is obvious that tangible documents were dependable by most of the Alumni, whereas online materials experienced an inverse pattern.
As is shown in the Print graph, around 95% of Postgraduates, who belonged to the University of Leeds, relied on print materials, exceeding the ratio of Undergraduates, which occupied 80%. This figure was extremely analogous to the volume of college students at the University of Oxford, and 5% more than the University of Cambridge in the same category. In contrast, the percentage of Bachelors justified tangible documents made up for 90% and 88% at Oxford Academy and Cambridge Academy respectively.
Now turning to another graph, two-third of university students of three British academic institutions had higher reliability of the document derived from the online platform. On the other hand, fewer Alumni opted for depending on online resources, in particular, exactly 50% 52% and 48% of Oxford, Cambridge, and Leeds University.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, look, so, third, whereas, in contrast, in particular, 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 : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 33.7804878049 95% => 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: 1049.0 965.302439024 109% => OK
No of words: 182.0 196.424390244 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.76373626374 4.92477711251 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.67297393991 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.2381475515 2.65546596893 122% => OK
Unique words: 117.0 106.607317073 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.642857142857 0.547539520022 117% => OK
syllable_count: 331.2 283.868780488 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.45097560976 124% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 26.0 22.4926829268 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 25.5646439523 43.030603864 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 149.857142857 112.824112599 133% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0 22.9334400587 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.7142857143 5.23603664747 205% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => 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: 0.176955966583 0.215688989381 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0738469244132 0.103423049105 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0495877275699 0.0843802449381 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0920008218815 0.15604864568 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0309864279919 0.0819641961636 38% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.7 13.2329268293 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 28.17 61.2550243902 46% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.51609756098 200% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 10.3012195122 153% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.42 11.4140731707 144% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.74 8.06136585366 133% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 40.7170731707 165% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.5 11.4329268293 144% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.9970731707 113% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => 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.