The bar chart shows the percentage of young people in higher education in 2000, 2005 and 2010.
The chart compares four countries in terms of the proportion of youngers studying higher education in different three years.
Overall, it is immediately obvious that no land had the more predominant number of students who kept studying after graduating than country D which witnessed the upward trend while B land almost remained steady and had the lowest this quantity in 2005 and 2010.
To commence with, country A and country D comprised at around 35% and 45% respectively in 2000. Although the former went up substantially by over 10% each five years, ending with just above 55%, the later also ranked the first with exactly 60% in 2010. Both two nations put more attetions on educational system.
By contrast, country B went down insignificantly, prior to standing at 40% in 2000. During the course of next five years, it recovered at the first point. Similarly, the percentage of country C changed inconsiderably from over 40% to under 50%. That increased minimally between 2000 and 2005, followed by reaching a plataeu.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-02-09 | phạm khánh linh | 78 | view |
| 2024-02-09 | phạm khánh linh | 78 | view |
| 2024-02-09 | phạm khánh linh | 78 | view |
| 2024-02-09 | phạm khánh linh | 73 | view |
| 2024-02-09 | phạm khánh linh | 78 | view |
- The diagram below shows one way of manufacturing ceramic pots 63
- Environmental protection is the responsibility of politicians not individuals as individuals can do too little To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
- The best way to solve the world s environmental problem is to increase the cost of fuel Do you agree or disagree 89
- The diagram below shows how electricity is generated in a hydroelectric power station Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The line graph below shows the household recycling rates in three different countries between 2005 and 2015 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 85, Rule ID: DURING_THE_COURSE_OF[1]
Message: Use simply 'During'.
Suggestion: During
...ntly, prior to standing at 40% in 2000. During the course of next five years, it recovered at the fi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, similarly, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 1.0 7.0 14% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 33.7804878049 104% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 870.0 965.302439024 90% => OK
No of words: 170.0 196.424390244 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.11764705882 4.92477711251 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.61087313685 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81999779136 2.65546596893 106% => OK
Unique words: 119.0 106.607317073 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.7 0.547539520022 128% => OK
syllable_count: 239.4 283.868780488 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
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: 18.0 22.4926829268 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 59.3516409542 43.030603864 138% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.6666666667 112.824112599 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8888888889 22.9334400587 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.11111111111 5.23603664747 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.160398639782 0.215688989381 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0615535676025 0.103423049105 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0418855103611 0.0843802449381 50% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0927544437266 0.15604864568 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0346026767954 0.0819641961636 42% => 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: 12.1 13.2329268293 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 70.13 61.2550243902 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 10.3012195122 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 11.4140731707 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.06136585366 108% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 40.7170731707 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.4329268293 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.9970731707 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.