The table describes the changes of people who went for international travel in 1990, 1995, 2000 and 2005 (million). Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparison where relevant.
The table illustrates the number of people going on international travel from 1990 to 2005.
Overall, the growth of the figure could be seen in most areas but America was a noticeable exception. Additionally, Europe always had the most figure over the period.
The figure for Europe was 280,2 million in 1990 then increased significantly to 390,3 million in 1995. After that, the figure rose slightly to 393,2 million in 2000 and 400,2 million in 2005. The number for Africa and Asia and the Pacific had the same trend as Europe, which were 18,2 million and 60,2 million in 1990 then reached 28,7 million and 135,8 million in 2005 respectively. During the period, the least figure was in the Middle East, which increased steadily from 9,8 million in 1990 to 15,8 million in 2005.
The change of people who went for international travel in America had a different trend from the others. The number for America was 80,5 million people in 1990. After rising sharply to 112,5 million in 1995, the number continued to rise slightly to 118,2 million in 2000 before falling back to around the 1995 level in 2005, at 113,2 million.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-10-26 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
| 2024-10-26 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
| 2024-10-13 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
| 2024-10-13 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
| 2024-10-13 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
- Rich countries often give money to poorer countries but it does not solve poverty Therefore developed countries should give other types of help to poor countries rather than financial aid 61
- Southland s main exports in 2000 2015 and future projection of 2025
- The maps below show the village of Stokeford in 1930 and in 2010 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The table below shows the number of motor vehicles per 1 000 inhabitants in eight countries in 1990 and 2000
- The chart below shows the expenditure on three categories among different age groups of residents in the UK in 2004 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 1.0 5.60731707317 18% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 33.7804878049 110% => 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: 933.0 965.302439024 97% => OK
No of words: 194.0 196.424390244 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.80927835052 4.92477711251 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.73207559907 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.39142483535 2.65546596893 90% => OK
Unique words: 99.0 106.607317073 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.510309278351 0.547539520022 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 255.6 283.868780488 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.33902439024 207% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.8169359016 43.030603864 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.3 112.824112599 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4 22.9334400587 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.3 5.23603664747 25% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
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: 0.294293696503 0.215688989381 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.137759194895 0.103423049105 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.081633828184 0.0843802449381 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.188234594905 0.15604864568 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.114459698411 0.0819641961636 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.2329268293 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 77.57 61.2550243902 127% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 10.3012195122 70% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.62 11.4140731707 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.94 8.06136585366 86% => OK
difficult_words: 29.0 40.7170731707 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.4329268293 74% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.0658536585 63% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.