The chart and graph below give the information about three categories of workers in Australia in 1991 and unemployment levels within those categories in three countries between 1991 and 2005.
Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The given chart and graph illustrates the three groups of laborers within the country of Australia in 1991 and unemployment rates in those groups in three nations from 1991 to 2005.
Overall, the Australian workers occupied the largest percentage in the workforce, and the workers speaking English constituted the smallest percentage. It is also noticeable that Germany’s joblessness rate increased, and Spain’s unemployment level decreased.
Regarding the pie chart, the workers who were Australian took up the majority of the entire proportion, at exactly 76%. The other two categories of laborers covered far smaller percentages, with 13% and 11% for the non-English speakers and English speakers, respectively.
Concerning the line graph, the unemployment rate of Germany was the smallest in the beginning, at precisely 4%. Then it rose steadily to nearly 10% in 1997, and then dropped slightly before going up in 2001 and finally reached its peak at about 12%, which almost tripled the initial figure. The rate of joblessness of Italy started at 8% and fluctuated during the provided period and eventually returned to the starting figure. Spain began with the highest unemployment level, over three times as Germany. However, after a peak between 1993 and 1995, it fell gradually to around 9% in the end.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-03-13 | nguyendangquang.aspect | 89 | view |
- Space exploration is a waste of money Do you agree or disagree 84
- The diagram shows the life cycle of a frog Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The graph below shows the average monthly change in prices of three metals during 2014 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- Some universities offer online courses as an alternative to classes delivered on campus Do you think this is a positive or negative development 90
- The flowchart shows the process of making jam Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 60
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, however, regarding, so, then
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 : 11.0 6.8 162% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 33.7804878049 112% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1111.0 965.302439024 115% => OK
No of words: 208.0 196.424390244 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.34134615385 4.92477711251 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.79765784423 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8855727578 2.65546596893 109% => OK
Unique words: 133.0 106.607317073 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.639423076923 0.547539520022 117% => OK
syllable_count: 319.5 283.868780488 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => 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: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.7089009017 43.030603864 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.1 112.824112599 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8 22.9334400587 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.3 5.23603664747 82% => 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 : 4.0 1.13902439024 351% => Less 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: 0.235524163293 0.215688989381 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.077971730045 0.103423049105 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100709824039 0.0843802449381 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145665951999 0.15604864568 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.127234310573 0.0819641961636 155% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.2329268293 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 61.2550243902 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 11.4140731707 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.26 8.06136585366 115% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 40.7170731707 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.