The table gives information about percentage of students giving good rating for five different aspects in a university in China in 2000,2005, 2010
Overall, the percentage of students voted for technical quantity, print resources , electronic resources increased,while the students preferred for range of modules offered decreased and the student voted for building/teaching facility kept stable
Referring to the three first aspects: electronic resources, print resources and technical quantity. In year 2000, the votes of students for electronic resources was the lowest with 45%. By contrast, the preference of students for print resources was the highest ( around 87% ) which almost doubled in comparison with that of electronic resources. The number of votes for technical quantity accounted for 63%. From 2000 to 2010, rating for electronic resources from students increased dramatically from 45% to 89%, while the percentage of students giving good feedback to print resources rose slightly ( about 4% ). Between 2000 and 2010, the percentage of students voting for technical quantity increased about 6 percent ( from 63 percent to 69 percent ).
Mention to the two rest aspects, It is clear from the table that the percentage of students rating for range of modules offered was the lowest in total of the votes and there was a continuous decrease during the period shown, while building/teaching facility received a relative high percentage of students rating with 75% and this figure remained unchanged over the period of 10 years
- You should spend about 20 minutes on this task The graph below shows the proportion of the population aged 65 and over between 1940 and 2040 in three different countries Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make compa 73
- You should spend about 20 minutes on this task The graph below shows the proportion of the population aged 65 and over between 1940 and 2040 in three different countries Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make compa 73
- The chart below shows the annual rice production in 4 countries in 1995 2005 2015 67
- The Graph Below Shows The Average Number Of Vietnamese Students Studying In France America And Russia Between 2000 And 2015 72
- The graph below shows population figures for India and China since the year 2000 and predicted population growth up until 2050 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 95
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 82, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
... for technical quantity, print resources , electronic resources increased,while th...
^^
Line 3, column 115, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , while
...sources , electronic resources increased,while the students preferred for range of mod...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 76, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s: electronic resources, print resources and technical quantity. In year 2000, th...
^^
Line 5, column 263, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ents for print resources was the highest around 87% which almost doubled in comp...
^^
Line 5, column 275, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nt resources was the highest around 87% which almost doubled in comparison with ...
^^
Line 5, column 324, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...lmost doubled in comparison with that of electronic resources. The number of vote...
^^
Line 5, column 428, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ty accounted for 63%. From 2000 to 2010, rating for electronic resources from stu...
^^
Line 5, column 602, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eedback to print resources rose slightly about 4% . Between 2000 and 2010, the pe...
^^
Line 5, column 612, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... print resources rose slightly about 4% . Between 2000 and 2010, the percentage o...
^^
Line 5, column 720, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nical quantity increased about 6 percent from 63 percent to 69 percent . Menti...
^^
Line 5, column 751, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...6 percent from 63 percent to 69 percent . Mention to the two rest aspects, It ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, so, while
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 : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 33.7804878049 124% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1301.0 965.302439024 135% => OK
No of words: 235.0 196.424390244 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53617021277 4.92477711251 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91531732006 3.73543355544 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98301869533 2.65546596893 112% => OK
Unique words: 115.0 106.607317073 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.489361702128 0.547539520022 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 375.3 283.868780488 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
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: 33.0 22.4926829268 147% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 151.368047204 43.030603864 352% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 185.857142857 112.824112599 165% => OK
Words per sentence: 33.5714285714 22.9334400587 146% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.85714285714 5.23603664747 55% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 11.0 1.69756097561 648% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
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: 0.381640447378 0.215688989381 177% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.180666846462 0.103423049105 175% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112769686588 0.0843802449381 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.319735902432 0.15604864568 205% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.243610367651 0.0819641961636 297% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 21.4 13.2329268293 162% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.98 61.2550243902 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 10.3012195122 157% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.44 11.4140731707 135% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.83 8.06136585366 110% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 40.7170731707 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 11.4329268293 171% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.2 10.9970731707 138% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.0658536585 145% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.