The diagrams below illustrate the early tools from 1.4 million years ago and 800,000 years ago. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and making comparisons where relevant.
The provided pictures compare the tools of old times from the period of 1.4 million years and 0.8 million years ago.
Looking from the overall perspective, it is readily apparent that although length(in cms) remained unchanged, over time, the outer appearance and shape undergo a significant change in terms of smoothness and sharpness.
To begin with, 1.4 million years ago, all the views of the early tools were highly uneven and asymmetrical, as shown in the first figure. Also, the front view of the 5cm stone was quite thick as compared to its back view. By contrast, the side view turned thinner at the top, compared to the bottom view.
Turning to 800,000 years ago, a dramatic change in the tools made them more sophisticated and symmetrical in look. The front and the back view shaped like an even water drop with a beautiful design on top of it. Also, the side view looked more sharpened, thin, and improved, perfect for cutting purposes.
- The chart below shows the amount of money per week spent on fast foods in Britain The graph shows the trends in the consumption of fast foods Write a report for a university lecturer describing the information shown below 11
- The illustrations show how chocolate is produced Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 11
- The diagram below shows the stages and equipment used in the cement making process and how cement is used to produce concrete for building purposes 84
- The pie charts below show the online sales for retail sectors in New Zealand in 2003 and 2013 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 65
- The diagram below shows the water supply in Australia at present and in the future 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, look, so, to begin with
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 : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 33.7804878049 65% => 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: 795.0 965.302439024 82% => OK
No of words: 163.0 196.424390244 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.8773006135 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.57311423478 3.73543355544 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46808832341 2.65546596893 93% => OK
Unique words: 106.0 106.607317073 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.650306748466 0.547539520022 119% => OK
syllable_count: 232.2 283.868780488 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.33902439024 161% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.3188818823 43.030603864 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.375 112.824112599 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.375 22.9334400587 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.23603664747 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More 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: 0.200522506734 0.215688989381 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0967278454239 0.103423049105 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.123404302794 0.0843802449381 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.139484061314 0.15604864568 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.110489071067 0.0819641961636 135% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.2329268293 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 61.2550243902 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.3012195122 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 11.4140731707 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.6 8.06136585366 107% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.