The first layout compares about the key factors that causes land degradation and the table provides information related to land degradation in three distinct areas of the world in the period of 1990s.
It is apparent that a much larger portion of land degraded by over-grazing all over the world whereas almost one-fourth of total land degraded in Europe due to three main reasons. Deforestation peaked in Europe.
According to the pie chart, globally over-grazing is the primary reason for less fertile agricultural land which is 35% to be more specific. The figures for deforestation and over-cultivation are 30% and 28% respectively where others reason considered as minor, figure stands slightly below than 10%.
On the other hand, 23% of total land became less productive in Europe and deforestation (9.8%) hold the first place cause behind land degradation. On the contrary, A large group of South Pacific islands including Australia and New Zealand comes next among three parts of the world. No land is seen here degraded due to over-cultivation while 11.3% out of 13% land accounted as less productive for over-grazing. In North America only 5% of land degraded which is the lowest portion as compared to other two regions.
- The charts below show the average percentages in typical meals of three types of nutrients all of which may be unhealthy if eaten too much Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features make comparisons where relevant 69
- The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by a particular UK school in 1981 1991 and 2001 78
- The bar chart below shows the percentage of Australian men and women in different age groups who did regular physical activity in 2010 73
- The pie charts below show the percentage of water used for different purposes in six areas of the world Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
- The graph below shows the quantities of goods transported in the UK between 1974 and 2002 by four different modes of transport Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant You should write at 82
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, so, whereas, while, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 33.7804878049 101% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 3.97073170732 277% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1038.0 965.302439024 108% => OK
No of words: 201.0 196.424390244 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16417910448 4.92477711251 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.76529505866 3.73543355544 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95976835364 2.65546596893 111% => OK
Unique words: 124.0 106.607317073 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.616915422886 0.547539520022 113% => OK
syllable_count: 312.3 283.868780488 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.6216322958 43.030603864 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.333333333 112.824112599 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3333333333 22.9334400587 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.22222222222 5.23603664747 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 1.13902439024 439% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.202599265042 0.215688989381 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0795980947427 0.103423049105 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0524789952346 0.0843802449381 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126787386923 0.15604864568 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0226513662758 0.0819641961636 28% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.2329268293 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 61.2550243902 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.3012195122 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 11.4140731707 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.73 8.06136585366 108% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 40.7170731707 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.4329268293 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => 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.