The graphs below show the amount of money spent on protecting crops in three different regions of the world in 2005.
The line chart demonstrates total expenditure on crop protection in three areas namely Africa, Europe and Australia in 2005 in millions. Overall, the protection cost for crops in Africa and Australia showed a rise over the period, while the expense for that of Europe experienced a downward trend.
From the beginning of 2005, the price for protecting harvests in Africa and Australia in millions were 600 and 200 respectively. Africa started with 600 expenditure in January. That was followed by a time of three months when numbers fell to 400, then experienced a rapid surge to approximately 900 and became the domineering category. The sum for that of Africa increased steadily throughout the year, reaching roughly 900 million in December; however, it remained to have the lowest budget compared to others in the end.
On the other hand, in early 2005, the crop’s protection budget of Europe (800 million) was the highest among these three countries. Nevertheless, it steeply dropped to 400, being about 500 less than that of Africa at the end of 2005.
- Some think that only those people who have worked for a company for many years should be promoted to a higher position Do you agree 89
- The graph below shows the percentage change in the number of international students graduating from universities in different Canadian provinces between 2001 and 2006 89
- The graphs below show the amount of money spent on protecting crops in three different regions of the world in 2005 84
- The graphs below show the amount of money spent on protecting crops in three different regions of the world in 2005 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 40, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'crops'' or 'crop's'?
Suggestion: crops'; crop's
... On the other hand, in early 2005, the crops protection budget of Europe 800 million...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, nevertheless, then, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 31.0 33.7804878049 92% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 914.0 965.302439024 95% => OK
No of words: 178.0 196.424390244 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13483146067 4.92477711251 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.65262427087 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75108866218 2.65546596893 104% => OK
Unique words: 104.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.584269662921 0.547539520022 107% => OK
syllable_count: 270.0 283.868780488 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.2132176086 43.030603864 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.25 112.824112599 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.25 22.9334400587 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.625 5.23603664747 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => 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: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.144339057174 0.215688989381 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0737234543543 0.103423049105 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0647431683179 0.0843802449381 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116825580517 0.15604864568 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0532627642636 0.0819641961636 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.2329268293 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 61.2550243902 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.3012195122 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 11.4140731707 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.06136585366 109% => OK
difficult_words: 46.0 40.7170731707 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.