The graph below shows changes in young adult unemployment rates in England between 1993 and 2012.
The line graph illustrates the unemployed percentage of people in England, over a period of 19 years, from 1993 to 2012.
Overall, it is clear that there were small changes in the percentage of unemployed young adult living in other areas. Young adult who aged 16 to 24 had the unemployed proportion was higher than overall level in both London and Rest of England. Moreover, young people from London had the higher unemployment rates than people from Rest of England.
In 1993, while the unemployment rate of young people aged 16 to 24 in London and Rest of England was 22% and 18% respectively, the number of unemployed people of all ages in London and Rest of England were 14% and 10% respectively. From 1993 to 1999, the UK's unemployment rate tended to decline. Over a period of 19 years, from 1993 to 2012, the number of unemployed young adult people aged 16 to 24 in London had the lowest rate at 15%. Besides, the unemployment rate for each of the other three groups fell by about 10%, the unemployment rate of 16 to 24-year-olds in Rest of England decreased to 10%, the unemployment proportion of all ages in London reduced to 8% and in other parts of England fell to 5%.
From 1999 to 2006, there was a rise to the figures for the overall unemployment rate in London and the remaining cities at the age of 16 to 24 while the percentage of unemployed people of all ages in the UK didn't change too much. The unemployment rate for adults who aged 16 to 24 in London peaked at 25% in 2012. Moreover, the proportion of young adult who aged 16 to 24 sharply rose to about 20% and remained unchanged until 2012. There was a slight upward trend of the overall unemployment rate for adults in England from 2006 to 2012. The percentage of unemployed young adult in London and Rest of England reached at 9% and 8% respectively.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-20 | manhnguyen | 73 | view |
| 2023-01-20 | Johndavisvu | 73 | view |
| 2022-09-24 | lattethuc | 73 | view |
| 2022-09-14 | Nguyễn Linh Hương | view | |
| 2022-08-20 | levanhoan123 | 67 | view |
- The diagram below shows the process for recycling plastic bottles Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 61
- In spite of the advances made in agriculture many people around the world still go hungry Why is this the case What can be done about this problem 52
- The charts below give information about the way in which water was used in different countries in 2000 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 82
- The diagram below shows the manufacturing process for making sugar from sugar cane Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
- In the future all cars buses and trucks will be driverless The only people travelling inside these vehicles will be passengers 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ates than people from Rest of England. In 1993, while the unemployment rate of ...
^^^
Line 7, column 208, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...unemployed people of all ages in the UK didnt change too much. The unemployment rate ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, moreover, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 6.8 147% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 76.0 33.7804878049 225% => Less preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 12.0 3.97073170732 302% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1503.0 965.302439024 156% => OK
No of words: 332.0 196.424390244 169% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.52710843373 4.92477711251 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.2685907696 3.73543355544 114% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6553951057 2.65546596893 100% => OK
Unique words: 115.0 106.607317073 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.346385542169 0.547539520022 63% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 432.0 283.868780488 152% => 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: 10.0 4.33902439024 230% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 8.94146341463 145% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.4926829268 111% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.8063177969 43.030603864 141% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.615384615 112.824112599 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5384615385 22.9334400587 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.84615384615 5.23603664747 35% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 1.13902439024 615% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.364204634948 0.215688989381 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.189210281942 0.103423049105 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0414715978663 0.0843802449381 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.26947933563 0.15604864568 173% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0200827012292 0.0819641961636 25% => 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: 12.7 13.2329268293 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 71.48 61.2550243902 117% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.3012195122 92% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.29 11.4140731707 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.68 8.06136585366 83% => OK
difficult_words: 38.0 40.7170731707 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.9970731707 109% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.