The first chart below gives information about the money spent by
British parents on their children’s sports between 2008 and 2014.
The second chart shows the number of children who participated in
three sports in Britain over the same time period.
The first graph details the statistical information on how much money was invested(in pounds) by parents in kids' sports activities in Britain over a period of 6 years from 2008 to 2014, while the second graph reveals the number of participants( in millions) in football, Athletics, and Swimming within the same time bracket.
Looking from the overall perspective, it is readily apparent that over the period as a whole, the average spendings rose significantly, and the majority of the participants were recorded in Football.
According to the given illustration, the average spending began at 20 pounds in 2008. However, the same went up to a peak of approximately 32 pounds by the period end, a noticeable change of about 12 pounds over the entire period.
Turning to the other chart, nearly 8 million children opted for Football compared to just 2.3 million swimmers, and only a million athletes. Moving on, in 2011, whilst athletes surpassed the swimmers to reach 5 million by the period end as against 4 million swimmers, the football continued to witness a substantial surge to climb at 9 million, just close to the double of the athletes' number.
- The tables below give information about sales of Fairtrade labelled coffee and bananas in 1999 and 2004 in five European countries 67
- The diagram below shows the water supply in Australia at present and in the future 78
- British Emigration to selected destinations from 2004 2007 presented in a bar chart 78
- Some people say that cities are a better place for children to grow up in while others believe countryside is the right choice Discuss both views give your own opinion and examples 93
- The graph below shows tourism statistics among Venezuelan students from 2011 to 2014 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, look, second, 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 : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 33.7804878049 112% => 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: 970.0 965.302439024 100% => OK
No of words: 192.0 196.424390244 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05208333333 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.72241943641 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87573586597 2.65546596893 108% => OK
Unique words: 121.0 106.607317073 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.630208333333 0.547539520022 115% => OK
syllable_count: 281.7 283.868780488 99% => 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: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.482926829268 621% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 6.0 8.94146341463 67% => 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: 32.0 22.4926829268 142% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 77.9593911384 43.030603864 181% => OK
Chars per sentence: 161.666666667 112.824112599 143% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.0 22.9334400587 140% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5 5.23603664747 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.230559255815 0.215688989381 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0967566176844 0.103423049105 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0864433861768 0.0843802449381 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.124701553432 0.15604864568 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0912194477168 0.0819641961636 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.4 13.2329268293 139% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.46 61.2550243902 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.3012195122 142% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.6 11.4140731707 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.42 8.06136585366 117% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 40.7170731707 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 11.4329268293 175% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.9970731707 135% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.0658536585 136% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.