The graph below shows the different modes of transport used to travel to and from work in one European city in 1960, 1980 and 2000.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
Write at least 150 words.
The graph illustrates the different types of transport used to commute in one European city in 1960, 1980 and 2000.
Overall, the trends of travellers who went to work by bus, bike and on foot were downward, while the use of car tended upward.
Starting at 35% of total travellers in 1960, travel on foot was by far the most popular transport. In 1980, however, the percentage of walking commuters witnessed a significant decrease at around 18%, twice as less as the initial level. After the sudden fall in the next twenty years, the figure continued to decline to 10% in 2000. Likewise, the number of people riding a bike to work started at around 28% in 1960, and then fall gradually to approximately 23% in 1980. The data continued to drop but at a considerable pace and ended at around 7% in 2000.
By contrast, having the lowest start at over 5%, however, there was a dramatic rise in the percentage of driving commuters, at 25% in 1980. Afterward, the figure continued to grow and reach the peak at around 38% in the last twenty years. In terms of riding a bus to work, the rate experienced a downward fluctuation from under 20% in 1960 to about 17% in 2000.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-08-26 | scarletnguyen | 61 | view |
- The graph below shows the different modes of transport used to travel to and from work in one European city in 1960 1980 and 2000 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant Write at least 150 61
- Writing Task 2 Children should always follow their parents advice To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement 74
- The line graph below shows changes in the amount and type of fast food consumed by Australian teenagers from 1975 to 2000 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant Write at least 150 words 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 216, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[1]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...t decrease at around 18%, twice as less as the initial level. After the sudden fal...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, likewise, then, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 0.0 5.60731707317 0% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 33.7804878049 160% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 965.0 965.302439024 100% => OK
No of words: 211.0 196.424390244 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.57345971564 4.92477711251 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.81127787577 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58755620082 2.65546596893 97% => OK
Unique words: 122.0 106.607317073 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.578199052133 0.547539520022 106% => OK
syllable_count: 279.0 283.868780488 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.33902439024 184% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 18.9515170897 43.030603864 44% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 96.5 112.824112599 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1 22.9334400587 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.9 5.23603664747 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
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: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.252918626415 0.215688989381 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104549181418 0.103423049105 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0902426827928 0.0843802449381 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.177728904786 0.15604864568 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.107347648385 0.0819641961636 131% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 13.2329268293 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 75.54 61.2550243902 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 10.3012195122 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.23 11.4140731707 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.9 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 40.7170731707 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.