The graph below shows the comparison between the number of applicants and the number of students who were granted admission.
The column graph illustrates about the number of application and the number of successful candidates. Every year we can find that the applicant numbers are higher than the seats.
In 1993 we can see a few candidates applied and a well number of applicants also selected. On the other hand, In 1994,1995 we find a great differences between the applicants and the successful students. In 1993 almost 200 applicants applied and near about 150 students successfully admitted but In 1994 and 1995 respectively 600 and just over 1000 students applied and only a few number of students could confirm their seats which was respectively 300 and 350. Besides, on 1996 to 1999 there is a very dramatically differences between the applicants and successful candidates. In 1996 to 1999 probably just over 500 candidates could successful for getting admission but it is a matter of fact, among those years the rate of unsuccessful candidates increased dramatically and those were respectively in 1996 just under 2000, in 1997 the rate was 2300, in 1998 it was exactly 2500 and in 1999 it approx just over 2500. Moreover, on the year among 2000 to 2003 we can find out the same case that happened few last years. The applicants rates becoming higher and higher, nut the successful applicants were only a few. On 2000 approximately 3200, in 2001 the rate of applicants not so change which was 3300, in 2002 it was just over 4000 and in 2003 the number of applicants were just under 4500. In addition, only 600 candidates successed among those years.
To sum up, overall, we can find that the rate of applicants was growing higher than the applicants who could successfully get admissions.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-01-19 | Fahimalvie | 89 | view |
- The map billow is of the town of Garlsdon and shows two possible sites for a new super market. Summaries the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 56
- The graph below shows the comparison between the number of applicants and the number of students who were granted admission 89
- The diagrams billow show the design for a wind turbine and its location.Summaries the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and compare where relevant. 78
- The diagrams billow show the stages and equipment used in the cement-making process, and how cement is used to produce concrete for building purposes.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where releva 78
- Process 11
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 377, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun number seems to be countable; consider using: 'few numbers'.
Suggestion: few numbers
...t over 1000 students applied and only a few number of students could confirm their seats w...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 894, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... 1998 it was exactly 2500 and in 1999 it approx just over 2500. Moreover, on the ...
^^
Line 3, column 1035, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'rate'.
Suggestion: rate
...happened few last years. The applicants rates becoming higher and higher, nut the suc...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, if, moreover, so, well, in addition, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 7.0 171% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 1.00243902439 698% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 15.0 6.8 221% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 5.60731707317 285% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 33.7804878049 136% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1398.0 965.302439024 145% => OK
No of words: 285.0 196.424390244 145% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.90526315789 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 3.73543355544 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81952040086 2.65546596893 106% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 106.607317073 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.459649122807 0.547539520022 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 391.5 283.868780488 138% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 15.0 3.36585365854 446% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 8.94146341463 134% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.4926829268 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 78.7838110838 43.030603864 183% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.5 112.824112599 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.75 22.9334400587 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.08333333333 5.23603664747 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 3.70975609756 243% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More 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: 0.222210349457 0.215688989381 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.105549931179 0.103423049105 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0802162792775 0.0843802449381 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.185184009256 0.15604864568 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0812423223232 0.0819641961636 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.2329268293 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 65.05 61.2550243902 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.49 11.4140731707 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.83 8.06136585366 85% => OK
difficult_words: 37.0 40.7170731707 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.9970731707 102% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => 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.