The charts show school expenditure and the proportion of students who gained higher education diplomas and degrees in Singapore from 2000 to 2012.
The illustration delineates the total school spending on each gender while the distribution of students who achieved higher education diplomas and degrees in Singapore between 2000 and 2012.
In general, the amount of money investing in school increased gradually every year. According to the pie chart, the percentage of genders gaining higher education diplomas and degrees showed a considerable gap from 2000 to 2012.
In the bar chart, the spending on school boys and girls showed a similar pattern of steady growth. In 2000, the amount of money used for men was slight than that of women, which was 9 million and 7 million respectively. The figure for males continued its rising trend, which was double that of females about 26 million in 2008 before reaching a peak of nearly 35 million in 2012. However, the allocation for females remained constant at 13 million in 2008, rising to 20 million in 2012.
In the pie chart, there was a significant gap in the proportion of student who achieved higher education in 2000, which was 73% for male tripled the figure for female. In 2012, the percentage of boy and girl were 68% and 32% respectively.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-05-08 | Thang Tran | 78 | view |
- The diagrams show total global population between 1900 and 2000, and its proportions according to region. 78
- Scientists and the news media are presenting ever more evidence of climate change.Governments cannot be expected to solve this problem. It is the responsibility of individuals to change their lifestyle to prevent further damage. 84
- It is neither possible nor useful to provide university places for a high proportion of young people 78
- two maps below show road access to a city hospital in 2007 and in 2010. 84
- The charts illustrate the number of people who were affected by four types of noise pollution in day and night in cities and rural areas in 2007. 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, while, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 33.7804878049 98% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 3.97073170732 176% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 963.0 965.302439024 100% => OK
No of words: 195.0 196.424390244 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93846153846 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.73687570622 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65353770039 2.65546596893 100% => OK
Unique words: 104.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.533333333333 0.547539520022 97% => OK
syllable_count: 274.5 283.868780488 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.33902439024 184% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.5774833578 43.030603864 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.0 112.824112599 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6666666667 22.9334400587 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.88888888889 5.23603664747 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 3.70975609756 189% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.374751241137 0.215688989381 174% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.152735049019 0.103423049105 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.157494455877 0.0843802449381 187% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.268645234781 0.15604864568 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.130498043626 0.0819641961636 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.2329268293 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 61.2550243902 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.3012195122 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 11.4140731707 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.0 8.06136585366 99% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
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.