The line graphs of five different communication services worldwide.
The line graph illustrates how many customers used five different communication services worldwide during a 10-year period from 1998 to 2008.
Overall, there was an increase in the number of users of cellular phone service, internet service, and landline service with cellular phone service witnessed the most drastic change, while the figure for fixed broadband and mobile broadband remained stable. It is also clear that the number of people using cellular phone service surpassed that of landline service to have the highest figure from 2002 onwards.
About 3% of the population used cellular phone service in 1998, with a subsequent increase to the south of 20% in 2002 and a final dramatic rise to its peak (around 68%) in 2008. The figure for landline service saw a similar change, but to a lesser extent, which started at roughly 16% and ended the period at just under 20%.
The percentage of people using internet service was at approximately 2%, followed by gradual growth to around 10% in 2004 and a sudden rise to just over 20% in 2008. Conversely, the figure for fixed broadband and mobile broadband experienced stability at 0% for about 6 years from 1998 to 2004 before ending the period at roughly 3%.
- The graph below shows the proportion of four different materials that were recycled from 1982 to 2010 in a particular country Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant Cambridge 7 test 2 task 1 78
- The line graphs of five different communication services worldwide 61
- The graph below shows the rate of smoking per 1000 people in Someland from 1960 to 2000 73
- The chart below shows the spending in million dollars per household in the US on five different products in 2010 and 2014 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, if, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 33.7804878049 118% => 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: 1012.0 965.302439024 105% => OK
No of words: 205.0 196.424390244 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93658536585 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.78388967377 3.73543355544 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52715884469 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 110.0 106.607317073 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536585365854 0.547539520022 98% => OK
syllable_count: 308.7 283.868780488 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 29.0 22.4926829268 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 36.551333765 43.030603864 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.571428571 112.824112599 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.2857142857 22.9334400587 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.14285714286 5.23603664747 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.20495690135 0.215688989381 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109944400652 0.103423049105 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.152380727914 0.0843802449381 181% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.164218720156 0.15604864568 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.182334575785 0.0819641961636 222% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 13.2329268293 125% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.5 61.2550243902 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.3012195122 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 11.4140731707 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.31 8.06136585366 103% => OK
difficult_words: 42.0 40.7170731707 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.9970731707 124% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.