The graph below shows the production of three forest industry products in a European country, namely timber, pulp, and paper from 1980 to 2000.
The line graph compares a nation in Europe in terms of the manufacture of three distinct forestry’s products over a period of 20 years from 1980 to 2000.
It is clear from the graph that during the research period, an instable trend was witnessed in all categories. Additionally, local inhabitants were prone to exploit forests to produce paper and pulp.
In 1980, standing at approximately 6 million tonnes, the number of pulp produced was highest, while there were around 5 million of log manufactured by residents. Likewise, the figure for paper was dwarfed by that of wood, at exactly 4 million.
To 1990, this country saw insignificant growths in the quantity of pulp and paper to 8 and about 7 million tonnes in turn. Meanwhile, the number of timber made underwent a steady increase to the point, at which it shared a comparable figure with that of pulp. In 2000, local people prioritised to exploit forests in order to produce paper with exactly 12 million tonnes. Conversely, there was a slow rise in the quantity of pulp to 10 million, whereas local citizens tended to reduce the manufacture of log with only about 8 million tonnes produced.
Give me a feedback containing the bandscore for each criteria
- The society would benefit from a ban on all forms of advertising because it serves no useful purpose and can even be damaging Do you agree or disagree 84
- The chart and the graph show the number of new graduates and the their employment in the UK from 1992 to 2002 84
- The plans below show a small theatre In 2010 and the same theatre in 2012 73
- The figures bolow compare the number of internet users in several European nation as well as the prevalence of online shopping in these countries 78
- The pictures show information about average income and spending on food and clothes by an average family in a city in the UK 61
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, if, likewise, whereas, 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 : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 45.0 33.7804878049 133% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1015.0 965.302439024 105% => OK
No of words: 207.0 196.424390244 105% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90338164251 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.79308509922 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80239043399 2.65546596893 106% => OK
Unique words: 122.0 106.607317073 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.589371980676 0.547539520022 108% => OK
syllable_count: 307.8 283.868780488 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.7149828503 43.030603864 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.5 112.824112599 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7 22.9334400587 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.0 5.23603664747 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 3.83414634146 130% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 1.13902439024 263% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.216768585627 0.215688989381 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0823555617772 0.103423049105 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0638862294664 0.0843802449381 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111565460053 0.15604864568 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0802844632597 0.0819641961636 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.2329268293 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 61.2550243902 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 11.4140731707 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.06136585366 108% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 40.7170731707 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.