The charts below show the proportions of British students at one university in England who were able to speak other languages in addition to English, in 2000 and 2010.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The two pie charts demonstrate the percentages of students at a British university able to speak languages other than English in 2000 and 2010.
As the first chart reveals, a large number of students in that university were able to speak Spanish, the percentage of which was twice the figure of French. The percentage of students who spoke another language except German, Spanish and French was equl to that of students able to speak French(15%). Following French, German and two other languages ranked the third, with 10% respectively. However, there were still 20% students who were unable to speak other language.
According to the second chart, the percentage of Spanish only rose frome 30% to 35%, ranking the first. Increases were also seen in the proportions of students able to speak two other languages and another language(15% in 2010 versus 20% in 2010). In contrast, there was a decline of 5% in figure corresponding to French only. The percentage of students who spoke German only remained stable, while figure for no other language dropped to 10%.
To sum up, Spanish was always the most popular second language in that university, and the proportion of bilinguists was also increasing.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-09 | ppatel | 73 | view |
| 2020-01-07 | Duong Linh | 61 | view |
| 2019-12-24 | nguyentuananh76 | 67 | view |
| 2019-12-17 | Jesslynindah | 84 | view |
| 2019-12-01 | Gre user | 78 | view |
- Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled. They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement. To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their was 56
- The charts below show the proportions of British students at one university in England who were able to speak other languages in addition to English, in 2000 and 2010.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make compari 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 4, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The two pie charts demonstrate the percentag...
^^
Line 3, column 29, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...nd 2010. As the first chart reveals, a large number of students in that university were able t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, second, so, still, third, while, in contrast, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 33.7804878049 101% => 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: 1008.0 965.302439024 104% => OK
No of words: 198.0 196.424390244 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09090909091 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.75116612262 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7003723853 2.65546596893 102% => OK
Unique words: 100.0 106.607317073 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.505050505051 0.547539520022 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 297.0 283.868780488 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 27.9365352182 43.030603864 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.8 112.824112599 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8 22.9334400587 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.7 5.23603664747 147% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.311610955668 0.215688989381 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.140766453236 0.103423049105 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.11248164235 0.0843802449381 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.219081455643 0.15604864568 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.12105116476 0.0819641961636 148% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.2329268293 94% => 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: 12.24 11.4140731707 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.53 8.06136585366 93% => OK
difficult_words: 37.0 40.7170731707 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.