These data source give information about the hectares of land used for organic food in country A and B from 1985 to 2010
Overall, it is clear that the land which were used to generate organic food in both countries fluctuated wildly, but the trend was upward.
In 1985, the organic foods were not popular in both countries and the land were used to product organic crops was small, just only 25 thousand hectares. In the next 5 years, the country A’s land rose slightly at 75 thousand hectares the country B had no change. There was a gradual increase in the organic food land in country A and B which were 175 and 125 thousand hectares respectively in 1995.
In the meanwhile, the hectares of land using for organic food in country B accelerated dramatically which peaked at nearly 300 thousand hectares in 2000. By contrast, the trend in country A was overtook by country B which was just merely 200 thousand hectares in the same period. By contrast, there were a steady fell in the land used for organic industry of both countries which were approximately 150 thousand hectares in the 10 next years.
- The graph below shows the average number of UK commuters travelling each day by car bus or train between 1970 and 2030 73
- The graph below shows the numbers of enquiries received by the Tourist Information Office in one city over a six month period in 2011 67
- The graph below shows in percentage terms the changing patterns of domestic access to modern technology in homes in the UK 67
- The graph below shows the average number of UK commuters travelling each day by car bus or train between 1970 and 2030 73
- The line below shows the land used for organic crops in two countries between 1985 to 2010 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 195, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'overtaken'.
Suggestion: overtaken
...By contrast, the trend in country A was overtook by country B which was just merely 200 ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 7.0 171% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 33.7804878049 83% => 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: 917.0 965.302439024 95% => OK
No of words: 196.0 196.424390244 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.67857142857 4.92477711251 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.74165738677 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5332596011 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 91.0 106.607317073 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.464285714286 0.547539520022 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 265.5 283.868780488 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 22.4926829268 124% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 45.3422360206 43.030603864 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.0 112.824112599 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.0 22.9334400587 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.0 5.23603664747 38% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => 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: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.23075120181 0.215688989381 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.137387316561 0.103423049105 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0637748976059 0.0843802449381 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.184835235919 0.15604864568 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0599988717637 0.0819641961636 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.2329268293 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.98 61.2550243902 98% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.8 10.3012195122 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.16 11.4140731707 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.36 8.06136585366 91% => OK
difficult_words: 29.0 40.7170731707 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.4329268293 114% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.9970731707 120% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => 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.