The table below shows percentage of students giving good ratings for different aspects of a university in China in 2000, 2005, 2010.
The table gives the information about the rates of students giving nice ratings for different aspects of a university in 2000, 2005 and 2010 in China
Overall, in three years 2000, 2005 and 2010 the percentage of students giving good ratings increased slightly in 3 different aspects (Technical Quality, Print Resources and Electronic Resources). It can be seen that the highest percentage of students voted for Print Resources while Range of Modules Offered had the fewest number of students rating.
As can be seen, there were 3 aspects which had a slight increase in the percentage of students giving good ratings: Technical Quality, Print Resources and Electronic Resources. Among three different aspects, Print Resources ranked the highest in the percentage of students with 87% in 2000 while at the same time attitudes of students to Electronic Resources was still low accounting for about 45%. After 10 years, the percentage of students giving good reviews to Electronic Resources nearly doubled with 89% in 2010. During this time, the number of students rating well for Technical Quality only had a minimal rise around 69% and this figure for Print Resources also fluctuated minimally but still increased by 4% from 2000 to 2010.
Turning to the two left aspects: Range of Modules Offered and Building/teaching facilities. In 2010, the rates of students giving good feedback for the former declined slightly with around 26%. Building/teaching facilities was the only one which the percentage of students giving good feedback remained stable for 10 years with 75%.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-09-06 | Giang Tran | 67 | view |
| 2021-09-06 | Giang Tran | 67 | view |
| 2021-09-06 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
| 2021-09-06 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
- AUSTRALIAN SECONDARY SCHOOL GRADUATES STEREOTYPES 78
- The graph below shows the number of overseas visitors to three different areas of a European country between 1987 and 2007 56
- Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own disadvantaged people like the homeless and unemployed To what extent do you agree or disagree 67
- The charts show information about children learning musical instruments in 1996 and 2016 in the UK 78
- The pie chart give information about visitors to the US from different countries from 1988 to 1992 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ersity in 2000, 2005 and 2010 in China Overall, in three years 2000, 2005 and 2...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 199, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rint Resources and Electronic Resources. It can be seen that the highest percenta...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... the fewest number of students rating. As can be seen, there were 3 aspects whi...
^^^
Line 3, column 340, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t the same time attitudes of students to Electronic Resources was still low accou...
^^
Line 3, column 403, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...was still low accounting for about 45%. After 10 years, the percentage of studen...
^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ill increased by 4% from 2000 to 2010. Turning to the two left aspects: Range o...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, so, still, well, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 1.00243902439 200% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 33.7804878049 121% => 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: 1338.0 965.302439024 139% => OK
No of words: 251.0 196.424390244 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33067729084 4.92477711251 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98032404683 3.73543355544 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95502066131 2.65546596893 111% => OK
Unique words: 119.0 106.607317073 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.474103585657 0.547539520022 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 377.1 283.868780488 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 31.0 22.4926829268 138% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 128.728153486 43.030603864 299% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 167.25 112.824112599 148% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.375 22.9334400587 137% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.625 5.23603664747 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 1.69756097561 353% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.09268292683 24% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.466690180971 0.215688989381 216% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.209324043411 0.103423049105 202% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.155162128439 0.0843802449381 184% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.370238023737 0.15604864568 237% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.161837575183 0.0819641961636 197% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.4 13.2329268293 147% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.47 61.2550243902 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.3012195122 138% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.23 11.4140731707 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.06136585366 102% => OK
difficult_words: 49.0 40.7170731707 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 27.0 11.4329268293 236% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 14.4 10.9970731707 131% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.0658536585 136% => 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.