The graph below shows the proportion of four different materials that were recycled from 1982 to 2010 in a particular country.
Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The line graph illustrates the percentage of rate in recylcing four particular materials between 1982 and 2010 in a country.
To begin with, the proportion of recycling paper and cardboard was always the highest rate as it started with about 65%. By 1994, the mentioned featured peaked at 80% in overall, followed by a gradual decrease to 70% at the end of the period. In addition, the percentage of recyling glass containers hit the lowest point at 40% in 1990, then the chart observed a steady climb and ended up with 60% in 2010.
Furthermore, recycling aluminium cans only started from 1986. The recycling rate started at lower one tenth and went up significantly to approximately one half percentage. Moreover, there was a stable increase in the proportion of recycling plastics which started in 1990 and ended up with just under 10% at the end of the period.
In overall, recycling rate in paper and cardboard was still the highest one even though it decreased for the last period. On the other hand, the percentage of reusing plastics creatively remained at the lowest rate.
- The graph below shows the number of tourists visiting a particular Caribbean island between 2010 and 2017 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
- The chart below shows the results of a survey about people s coffee and tea buying and drinking habits in five Australian cities Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 44
- Some people say that advertising is extremely successful at persuading us to buy things Other people think that advertising is so common that we no longer pay attention to it Discuss both these views and give your own opinion 89
- The graph below shows the proportion of four different materials that were recycled from 1982 to 2010 in a particular country Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 63
- The two maps below show road access to a city hospital in 2007 and 2010 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 56
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, if, moreover, still, then, in addition, to begin with, on the other hand
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: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 33.7804878049 118% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 907.0 965.302439024 94% => OK
No of words: 184.0 196.424390244 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.92934782609 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.68302321012 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75207753626 2.65546596893 104% => OK
Unique words: 103.0 106.607317073 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.559782608696 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 266.4 283.868780488 94% => 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: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.1183197182 43.030603864 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.777777778 112.824112599 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4444444444 22.9334400587 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.44444444444 5.23603664747 180% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.105534940474 0.215688989381 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0502553109065 0.103423049105 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0580202977721 0.0843802449381 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0852298722256 0.15604864568 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0729319653009 0.0819641961636 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.2329268293 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 61.2550243902 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.3012195122 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 11.4140731707 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.89 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 38.0 40.7170731707 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.