The pie charts depict the number of journal articles which three different groups (including all students, PhD students and junior lecturers) read at a university of Australia. The information is given about the percentage of people in each group who read 1 to 5, 6 to 11 and more than 12 articles weekly.
Overall, PhD students had the greatest amount of reading articles among all groups compared to the group of all students who had the least amount of reading. Also the number of junior lecturers with reading less than five articles per week was significantly low.
According to pie charts 80%of PhD students read more than 12 articles which made up the largest proportion of reading, this percentage was 24 for junior lecturers and 12 for all students. In terms of reading 6 to 11 articles per week, junior lecturers outnumbered other groups by 75%, while it was 21% for all students and 15% for PhD students which was relatively close to each other.
With regards to reading 1 to 5 articles which is the minimum amount of reading, junior lecturers were the least with just 1% while PhD students were 5% which is also a low percentage as opposed to 67% for all students which is significantly high.
- Some children spend hours every day on their smartphones Why is this the case Do you think this is a positive or a negative development 67
- Online shopping is replacing shopping in stores Is it a positive or negative development 78
- Nowadays many children have trouble paying attention in class or concentrating on their school work Why is this happening How can this problem be solved 73
- The graph shows data on the manufacture of passenger cars in 2015 78
- Everyone should become vegetarian because they do not need to eat meat to have a healthy diet Do you agree or disagree 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 159, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...ts who had the least amount of reading. Also the number of junior lecturers with rea...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 7.0 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 3.15609756098 253% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 33.7804878049 89% => 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: 1002.0 965.302439024 104% => OK
No of words: 210.0 196.424390244 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.77142857143 4.92477711251 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.80675409584 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6193939165 2.65546596893 99% => OK
Unique words: 98.0 106.607317073 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.466666666667 0.547539520022 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
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: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => 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: 30.0 22.4926829268 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 43.2562370164 43.030603864 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.142857143 112.824112599 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.0 22.9334400587 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.71428571429 5.23603664747 52% => 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: 0.450281178998 0.215688989381 209% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.247142756945 0.103423049105 239% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.119787878076 0.0843802449381 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.308100494276 0.15604864568 197% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0651933333417 0.0819641961636 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 13.2329268293 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 66.41 61.2550243902 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.3012195122 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.98 11.4140731707 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.31 8.06136585366 91% => OK
difficult_words: 29.0 40.7170731707 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 10.9970731707 127% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => 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.