The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in Australia in 1999. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant
Family type Proportion of people from each household type living in poverty
Single aged person 8% (55,000)
Aged couple 4% (48,000)
Single, no children 19% (359,000)
Couple, no children 7% (211,000)
Sole parent 21% (232,000)
Couple with children 13% (933,000)
All households 12% (1,837,000)
The table gives information about the rate of different types of households living in poverty in Australia in 1999.
As we can see from the data, people who were single had a lower level of living conditions than those married. The poverty rates of the elderly are considerably lowest.
Overall, 11% of Australian, or 1,837,000 people were in poverty in 1999. Aged people were the group owned the lowest level of poverty, with 4% for the aged couple and 6% for the aged single.
Just 19% of single parents were in poor, while only 12% of couples were living with partners were lives below the poverty line. It is also noticeable that levels of poverty were higher for single had no children, with 19%, compared to the figure 7% of the couple without children.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-03-08 | leuyen0805 | 56 | view |
- The graph below shows average obesity rates in the USA according to gender from 2000 to 2008 100
- The graph below shows average obesity rates in the USA according to gender from 2000 to 2008
- The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in Australia in 1999. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevantFamily type 56
- Some people think that the detailed criminal description on newspaper and TV há bad influences, so this kind of information should be restricted on the media. To what extend do you agree or disagree? 73
- The following graph shows the production of electricity according to source in France between 1985 and 2000 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, so, 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 : 2.0 6.8 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 33.7804878049 71% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 635.0 965.302439024 66% => OK
No of words: 134.0 196.424390244 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.73880597015 4.92477711251 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.40232815919 3.73543355544 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.34125066299 2.65546596893 88% => OK
Unique words: 83.0 106.607317073 78% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.619402985075 0.547539520022 113% => OK
syllable_count: 194.4 283.868780488 68% => 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: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => 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: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.0543724959 43.030603864 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.7142857143 112.824112599 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1428571429 22.9334400587 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.71428571429 5.23603664747 52% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 3.70975609756 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 1.13902439024 615% => Less 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: 0.101485052582 0.215688989381 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0605488317862 0.103423049105 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0963943345155 0.0843802449381 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0939884463196 0.15604864568 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.11322913405 0.0819641961636 138% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 13.2329268293 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 61.2550243902 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.3012195122 92% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.21 11.4140731707 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.23 8.06136585366 102% => OK
difficult_words: 31.0 40.7170731707 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.4329268293 66% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
More content wanted.
Minimum 150 words wanted.
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.