The picture illustrates the disparity of a park named Grange Park between 1920 and today.
Looking from an overall perspective, it is readily apparent that the park added and expanded areas mainly related to entertainment including a larger stage and various areas for recreation. There was also significant relocation in terms of seating and the only areas that remained the same were the entrances and one minor garden.
The most significant change to the park is the fountain in the center of the park has been demolished to make room for a rose garden with full seating around. To the left of the garden, the previous stage for the musicians to give their performances has been expanded with the removal of one garden on left bottom of the park to allow for holding concerts here.
To the right side of the park, a café has taken place the position of the rose garden and next to a café there was a pond for providing water plants, is a place for children’s entertainment now. To the right bottom of the park, the glass house has been demolished for the construction of water feature and there has been an additional entrance underground car park nearby the water feature.
The most significant change to the park is the fountain in the center of the park has been demolished to make room for a rose garden with full seating around. To the left of the garden, the previous stage for the musicians to give their performances has been expanded with the removal of one garden on left bottom of the park to allow for holding concerts here.
To the right side of the park, a café has taken place the position of the rose garden and next to a café there was a pond for providing water plants, is a place for children’s entertainment now. To the right bottom of the park, the glass house has been demolished for the construction of water feature and there has been an additional entrance underground car park nearby the water feature.
- The diagram below shows the floor plan of a public library 20 years ago and how it looks now 73
- The chart below shows waste collection by a recycling centre from 2011 to 2015 73
- Some groups of people have benefited from modern communication technology However some think they do not have any benefit from this To what extent do you agree or disagree 56
- Today the high sales of popular consumer goods reflect the power of advertising and not the real needs of the society in which they are sold To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
- The chart below shows waste collection by a recycling centre from 2011 to 2015 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 195, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...place for children’s entertainment now. To the right bottom of the park, the glass...
^^
Line 5, column 195, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...place for children’s entertainment now. To the right bottom of the park, the glass...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, look, so, as for
/var/www/anaconda2/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vaderSentiment/vaderSentiment.py:242: UnicodeWarning: Unicode equal comparison failed to convert both arguments to Unicode - interpreting them as being unequal
if chr in self.emojis:
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 7.0 243% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 33.7804878049 136% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 3.97073170732 277% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1526.0 965.302439024 158% => OK
No of words: 329.0 196.424390244 167% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.63829787234 4.92477711251 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25891501996 3.73543355544 114% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59788284908 2.65546596893 98% => OK
Unique words: 96.0 106.607317073 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.29179331307 0.547539520022 53% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 468.9 283.868780488 165% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.33902439024 184% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 32.0 22.4926829268 142% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 21.4301189917 43.030603864 50% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 152.6 112.824112599 135% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.9 22.9334400587 143% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.6 5.23603664747 50% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 3.83414634146 130% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 3.70975609756 216% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.145300647286 0.215688989381 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0866111733267 0.103423049105 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0471306635257 0.0843802449381 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106998375128 0.15604864568 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0287339404392 0.0819641961636 35% => 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: 16.9 13.2329268293 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.92 61.2550243902 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.3012195122 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.22 11.4140731707 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.14 8.06136585366 89% => OK
difficult_words: 40.0 40.7170731707 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.4329268293 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.9970731707 135% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.