The chart illustrates distances traveled per person per week (in kilometers) in terms of 5 types of transport in the UK between 1990 and 2000.
The bar graph compares the average weekly distances travelled (in kilometers) per person in 1990 and 2000 by mode of transport. The data is from the UK, and there are five categories (bicycle, motorbike, airplane, bus and rail) as well as the total for all of them.
Overall, people travelled longer distances in 2000 compared to 1990, especially by air, bus and rail. Distances for the other two categories went down.
In detail, the longest distances were recorded for bus transportation with rail coming in a close second. In 1990, people on average travelled 40 km/week by bus and 35 km/week by rail. The corresponding values for 2000 were higher, 42 and 38 km/week. The total for the other three was about 10 km/week. In 1990, that was composed of 4 for bicycles, 5 for motorbikes and 1 for air, which makes the sum total of all five to be just short of the reported total of 100 km/week. Air was the category with the greatest percentage increase; it rose from about 1 to 5 km/week.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-16 | MinhMinh122 | view | |
| 2023-07-16 | MinhMinh122 | view | |
| 2023-06-10 | baguette | 78 | view |
| 2023-06-10 | baguette | view | |
| 2023-06-01 | baguette | 78 | view |
- The chart illustrates distances traveled per person per week in kilometers in terms of 5 types of transport in the UK between 1990 and 2000 78
- The chart illustrates distances traveled per person per week in kilometers in terms of 5 types of transport in the UK between 1990 and 2000 78
- The chart illustrates distances traveled per person per week in kilometers in terms of 5 types of transport in the UK between 1990 and 2000
- It is neither possible nor useful for a country to provide university places for a high proportion of young people To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
- The charts detail the proportion of Australian secondary school graduates who were unemployed employed or further education in 1980 1990 and 2000
Transition Words or Phrases used:
second, so, well, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 7.0 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 33.7804878049 83% => 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: 815.0 965.302439024 84% => OK
No of words: 176.0 196.424390244 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.63068181818 4.92477711251 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.64232057368 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62496925405 2.65546596893 99% => OK
Unique words: 97.0 106.607317073 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.551136363636 0.547539520022 101% => OK
syllable_count: 234.0 283.868780488 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.674377977 43.030603864 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 81.5 112.824112599 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6 22.9334400587 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.8 5.23603664747 53% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.234996070381 0.215688989381 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112278477994 0.103423049105 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.126713690534 0.0843802449381 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.201186234735 0.15604864568 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0945244397786 0.0819641961636 115% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.2 13.2329268293 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 79.6 61.2550243902 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.4 10.3012195122 62% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.28 11.4140731707 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.06136585366 95% => OK
difficult_words: 35.0 40.7170731707 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.4329268293 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => 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.