The graphs below show how people in a European city reached their office and got back home in 1959 and 2009 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant You should write at least 150 words

Essay topics:

The graphs below show how people in a European city reached their office and got back home in 1959 and 2009.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
You should write at least 150 words.

The pie charts delineated how residents in a European country commute to work and come back home from 1959 to 2009. There were four particular categories in two pie charts which were foot, bus, train, car. There was also a fifth option in the pie charts called “Other”.
Overall, in 1959, the majority of people commuted to work on foot while in 2009 it changed to the uprising use of car. Moreover, the average distance and the average time for committing to work were increased significantly, which proliferated by more than a factor of five and more than doubled respectively.
In detail, in 1959, 30% of people in a European’s city used public transport as their main transportation and 55% of them walked to their workplace. In contrast, in 1959, the proportion of those who used cars was increased to 35% when walking curbed more than doubled from 55% to 25%. Furthermore, the people who walked made up a quarter of the percentage. The commute distance grew from 3.5 km to 19 km while the average time proliferated from 17 to 42 minutes.

Votes
Average: 4.3 (2 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2021-04-03 Đức An 43 view
2020-09-19 asmita acharya view
2020-09-19 asmita acharya 74 view
2020-09-19 asmita acharya view
2020-09-10 stella1303 78 view
Essays by user Đức An :

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 345, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ked made up a quarter of the percentage The commute distance grew from 35 km to 19 km while...
^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, furthermore, if, moreover, so, while, in contrast

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 : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 33.7804878049 101% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 3.97073170732 101% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 837.0 965.302439024 87% => OK
No of words: 183.0 196.424390244 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.5737704918 4.92477711251 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.67800887145 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66077015378 2.65546596893 100% => OK
Unique words: 100.0 106.607317073 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.546448087432 0.547539520022 100% => OK
syllable_count: 259.2 283.868780488 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: 1.0 4.33902439024 23% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 3.36585365854 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 1.0 8.94146341463 11% => 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: 183.0 22.4926829268 814% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 0.0 43.030603864 0% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 837.0 112.824112599 742% => Less chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 183.0 22.9334400587 798% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 55.0 5.23603664747 1050% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.09268292683 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.113243115013 0.215688989381 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113243115013 0.103423049105 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0843802449381 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0728042198956 0.15604864568 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0214044669319 0.0819641961636 26% => 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: 91.6 13.2329268293 692% => Automated_readability_index is high.
flesch_reading_ease: -97.35 61.2550243902 -159% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 0.0 6.51609756098 0% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 72.3 10.3012195122 702% => Flesch kincaid grade is high.
coleman_liau_index: 10.41 11.4140731707 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 15.91 8.06136585366 197% => OK
difficult_words: 37.0 40.7170731707 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 58.0 11.4329268293 507% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 75.2 10.9970731707 684% => Gunning_fog is high.
text_standard: 92.0 11.0658536585 831% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.