The charts show the main methods of transport of people travelling to one university in 2004 and 2009.
Summarise the information be selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant
The given pie charts compare the percentage of students using five different means of transportation(Car, Train, Bus, Bicycle, and Walking) to travel to a particular university during 2004 and 2009.
It is noticeable that travelling by train was the least favoured form of transportation, while there was a change, from cars to buses, for the most commonly used form of transport over the five year period.
In 2004, just over half of the students travelled to the university by car, with only a third taking a bus. The remaining students rode a bike, went on foot or took a train, with the figures being 9%, 4%, and 3%respectively.
However, with the construction of a new bus stop in 2008 and the introduction of car parking fees in 2006, in 2009 the number of students commuting by car dropped to 28%, and consequently, the number of students travelling by all other methods increased. Those travelling by bus increased to 46%, bicycle user's rose to 16%, and both train travellers and walkers increased by 1% and 2% respectively
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-31 | Nguyen Manh Dung | 78 | view |
| 2019-12-31 | Nguyen Manh Dung | 78 | view |
- The chart below shows Japan s population by age groups starting in 1960 and including a forecast to 2040 89
- In today s world of advanced science and technology we still greatly value our artists such as musicians painters and writers What can arts tell us about life that science and technology cannot 73
- Research shows that business meetings discussions and training are happening online nowadays Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages 89
- Many museums and historical sites are mainly visited by tourists but not local people Why is this the case and what can be done to attract more local people to visit these places 89
- The table below presents the food consumption per a person weekly in a European country in 1992 2002 and 2012 89
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, however, if, third, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 6.8 132% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 33.7804878049 101% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 860.0 965.302439024 89% => OK
No of words: 176.0 196.424390244 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.88636363636 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.64232057368 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04718721912 2.65546596893 115% => OK
Unique words: 110.0 106.607317073 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.625 0.547539520022 114% => OK
syllable_count: 246.6 283.868780488 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.482926829268 828% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 6.0 8.94146341463 67% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 29.0 22.4926829268 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 52.7523037938 43.030603864 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.333333333 112.824112599 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.3333333333 22.9334400587 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5 5.23603664747 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => 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: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.128450202062 0.215688989381 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0666714748635 0.103423049105 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0333856854257 0.0843802449381 40% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0809745082576 0.15604864568 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.030744516844 0.0819641961636 38% => 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: 16.3 13.2329268293 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.96 61.2550243902 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.2 10.3012195122 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.67 11.4140731707 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.21 8.06136585366 102% => OK
difficult_words: 35.0 40.7170731707 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.4329268293 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.9970731707 124% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => 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.