The graph below shows the employment rate of each gender in four different countries in 2002.4
The bar graph shows that the different in the workforce between men and women in South Africa, Chile, Finland, Norway in 2002.
Overall, it is clear that the proportion of men was higher than that of women in 4 countries. It was noticeable that there was the relatively close of the rate of 2 sexes in Finland and Norway. There was also a huge disparity in South Africa and Chile. In Chile, the difference between male and female workers was largest.
Looking at the graph more closely, one can see that the rate of man was descended in sequential order as Norway, Chile, Finland and South Africa. The proportion of man in Norway accounted for the largest group within 4 countries with approximately 80%, while the next sequential ranks were Chile and Finland with nearly 70%. However, South Africa hit the low of the workforce competition with just a half of man population have jobs. Furthermore, in the case of women, Norway and Finland were still the dominance with approximately 75% and 65% respectively, whilst Chile just represented a half of the proportion when compared to Finland and stayed at the lowest rank within the others. Although South Africa have the lowest man worker but in the case of women, the proportion of their women stayed at the third position with nearly 40%, a little higher to Chile ‘s female employment rate.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-07-27 | Tôn Nguyễn Hồng Phúc | 73 | view |
- the information about government expenditure in five sectors relating to domestic policy in Germany Italy and the United Kingdom in 2009 56
- The reasons people in Great Britain had for visiting art museums in the years 1990 and 2000 73
- The Marlton Gallery before and after it was renovated 84
- the layouts of two offices one to accommodate a maximum of eight people and the other to fit a maximum of ten people 78
- The developments along Olive Drive before and after the construction of new facilities between 1980 and 2010 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, if, look, so, still, third, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 6.8 147% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 33.7804878049 110% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 3.97073170732 252% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1116.0 965.302439024 116% => OK
No of words: 232.0 196.424390244 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.81034482759 4.92477711251 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.90276135726 3.73543355544 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57576916695 2.65546596893 97% => OK
Unique words: 116.0 106.607317073 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.547539520022 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 337.5 283.868780488 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.4926829268 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.7550848863 43.030603864 137% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.6 112.824112599 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2 22.9334400587 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.6 5.23603664747 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => 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: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0983907358126 0.215688989381 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0469917778687 0.103423049105 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0565077733004 0.0843802449381 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0981334406572 0.15604864568 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0682623802976 0.0819641961636 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.2329268293 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 61.2550243902 92% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.91 11.4140731707 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.91 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 46.0 40.7170731707 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.4329268293 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.9970731707 102% => 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.