The table below shows changes in the numbers of residents cycling to work in different areas of the UK between 2001 and 2011.
The table compares the numbers of people who cycled to work in twelve areas of the UK in the years 2001 and 2011.
Overall, the number of UK commuters who travelled to work by bicycle rose considerably over the 10-year period. Inner London had by far the highest number of cycling commuters in both years.
In 2001, well over 43 thousand residents of inner London commuted by bicycle, and this figure rose to more than 106 thousand in 2011, an increase of 144%. By contrast, although outer London had the second highest number of cycling commuters in each year, the percentage change, at only 45%, was the lowest of the twelve areas shown in the table.
Brighton and Hove saw the second biggest increase (109%) in the number of residents cycling to work, but Bristol was the UK’s second city in terms of total numbers of cycling commuters, with 8,108 in 2001 and 15,768 in 2011. Figures for the other eight areas were below the 10 thousand mark in both years.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-12-01 | sanjana rani | 73 | view |
| 2020-11-06 | Joel James | 61 | view |
- The graph below shows the percentages changes in the number of international students graduating from universities in different Canadian provinces between 2001 and 2006. 60
- The table below show information about travelling to work in one US city. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 55
- The graph below shows the writing technology used by undergraduate students to prepare assignments at a university in 1970 1982 and 1994 85
- Some people say that tourism has many negative effects on the countries that people travel to.How true is this statement? What can tourists do to reduce the harmful effects of tourism on local cultures and environments? 85
- The graph and table below give information about water use worldwide and water consumption in two different countries. 60
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 7.0 out of 9
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 7 10
No. of Words: 171 200
No. of Characters: 764 1000
No. of Different Words: 89 100
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.616 4.0
Average Word Length: 4.468 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.18 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 53 60
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 34 50
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 19 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 9 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.429 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.022 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.429 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.492 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.757 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.105 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 4