The chart shows the percentage of female members of parliament in 5 European countries from 2000 to 2012.
The given chart demonstrates the proportion of women joining parliament in 5 countries in Europe during the period of 2000 to 2012. Overall, the rate of female members of parliament experienced an increase throughout the surveyed period.
In Germany and France, there was a similar trend as the figure kept climbing gradually over the years without a drop, from around 34% to 37%, and 25% to 32%, respectively. In Italy, on the other hand, the rate started in second place in 2000 at 26%. Over the next 12 years, their number climbed up significantly, surpassed Germany in 2010 to claim the first place in 2012 with 39%. Beginning with only 4%, the lowest ratio out of 5 countries, the percentage of women taking a role in the UK government rised dramatically over 12 years by 19%, the largest jump, to around 23% in 2012. However in Belgium, the trend was a bit different. Despite a significant raise from 16% to 24% during the first 8 years, the rate suffered from a slight fall to 23%, the same figure as the UK.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-06-15 | alifdores | 84 | view |
| 2019-03-07 | Mia Nguyen | 73 | view |
| 2018-06-03 | Chi Nguyen | 67 | view |
| 2018-06-03 | Chi Nguyen | 67 | view |
| 2017-09-27 | lethianhthu | 78 | view |
- The chart below shows the percentage of a drug company s total sales by region from 2002 to 2006 84
- The chart below shows the percentage of households in owned and rented accommodation in England and Wales between 1918 and 2011 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The diagrams below show how a park in a city changed over time 78
- The graph shows the percentage of Australian exports to 4 countries from 1990 to 2012 78
- The graph below shows the number of overseas visitors who came to the UK for different purposes between 1989 and 2009 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 585, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...he largest jump, to around 23% in 2012. However in Belgium, the trend was a bit differe...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, second, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 2.0 7.0 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 6.8 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 0.0 3.15609756098 0% => OK
Pronoun: 1.0 5.60731707317 18% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 33.7804878049 127% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 3.97073170732 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 838.0 965.302439024 87% => OK
No of words: 181.0 196.424390244 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.62983425414 4.92477711251 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.66791821706 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66255928398 2.65546596893 100% => OK
Unique words: 111.0 106.607317073 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.613259668508 0.547539520022 112% => OK
syllable_count: 239.4 283.868780488 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.33902439024 207% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.4737218072 43.030603864 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.75 112.824112599 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.625 22.9334400587 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.625 5.23603664747 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 2.0 3.83414634146 52% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.229702516006 0.215688989381 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0862776533481 0.103423049105 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0808483938313 0.0843802449381 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.204743941983 0.15604864568 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.102303014985 0.0819641961636 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.2329268293 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 74.53 61.2550243902 122% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 10.3012195122 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.87 11.4140731707 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.3 8.06136585366 103% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => 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.