the plans below show a public park when it was first opened in 1920 and the same park today Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant

The first figure illustrates the map of the Grange park in 1920, which was the year that park was opened. Meanwhile, the second figure shows the same park and the change that has applied to it in our present time.

Overall, between 1920 and today, the number of rose gardens decreases, and some of the places, such as pond for water plants and fountain are eliminated. However, several facilities, including a cafe', children's play area, and water features, are added to the park.

In details, it can be observed that in 1920, there were 3 rose gardens in the park, which were located near the Arnold avenue and the Eldon Avenue entrances. There was a fountain in the center of the park, and a stage for musicians was placed on the right side of it. Also, the park had a pond for water plants and a glasshouse.

Today, the fountain is demolished and replaced by a rose garden which is surrounded by several seats. The rose garden on the left side of the Arnold avenue entrance is replaced with a cafe' next to the children's play area. At present, the water feature is constructed, where the glasshouse used to be, near the new underground parking lot entrance. There is a huge amphitheater for concerts on the right corner of the park, where the stage for musicians was located.

Votes
Average: 7.3 (1 vote)
Essays by the user:

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...has applied to it in our present time. Overall, between 1920 and today, the num...
^^^
Line 3, column 76, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...e number of rose gardens decreases, and some of the places, such as pond for water plants a...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 266, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... water features, are added to the park. In details, it can be observed that in 1...
^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, second, so, while, such as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 7.0 229% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 6.8 132% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 3.15609756098 253% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 27.0 33.7804878049 80% => 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: 1058.0 965.302439024 110% => OK
No of words: 228.0 196.424390244 116% => OK
Chars per words: 4.64035087719 4.92477711251 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.88582923847 3.73543355544 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46310103898 2.65546596893 93% => OK
Unique words: 115.0 106.607317073 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.504385964912 0.547539520022 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 324.9 283.868780488 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.33902439024 161% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 0.482926829268 621% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 8.94146341463 123% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 24.8150181134 43.030603864 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 96.1818181818 112.824112599 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7272727273 22.9334400587 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.36363636364 5.23603664747 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.230514439615 0.215688989381 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0950122244836 0.103423049105 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0640407985613 0.0843802449381 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.154621240106 0.15604864568 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0680354994334 0.0819641961636 83% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.8 13.2329268293 82% => 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: 9.63 11.4140731707 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.68 8.06136585366 95% => OK
difficult_words: 44.0 40.7170731707 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.