The table provides information on the percentage of students who gave a good rating on five different aspects of a university in China in the years 2000, 2005, 2010
Overall, in the three years 2000, 2005, 2010 the rating of print resources had the highest rate, and range of modules offered ranked the lowest. There was a stable attitude to the building/ teaching facilities for all 3 years.
In 3 years already stated, the rating for print resources, technical quality and electronic resources all increased. In 2000, the rating for print resources peaked at 87%, technical quality reached 63% and electronic resources was the lowest with only 45%. While ratings for electronic resources was nearly double to 89% at the end of 2010, technical quality increased slightly to 69%. Rating for print resources fluctuated slightly but was still up in comparison with its of the beginning and reached 91% in the final year.
Turning to the two left aspects, the number of students rating for building/teaching facilities remained stable at 75% for all three mentioned years, while there was a slight decrease in the proportion of students giving good reviews from 33% to 26% during the period shown.
- The Graph Below Shows The Average Number Of Vietnamese Students Studying In France America And Russia Between 2000 And 2015 56
- The chart below shows the annual rice production in 4 countries in 1995 2005 2015 73
- The picture illustrates how a medical centre changed after some developments in 2010 compared to 2008 73
- The graph below gives information about changes in the birth and death rates in New Zealand between 1901 and 2101 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The table below shows the average band scores for students from 4 different countries taking the IELTS Test in 2009 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...in China in the years 2000, 2005, 2010 Overall, in the three years 2000, 2005, ...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... teaching facilities for all 3 years. In 3 years already stated, the rating fo...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ing and reached 91% in the final year. Turning to the two left aspects, the num...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 103, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... rating for building/teaching facilities remained stable at 75% for all three men...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, so, still, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 1.0 5.60731707317 18% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 33.7804878049 92% => 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: 1000.0 965.302439024 104% => OK
No of words: 198.0 196.424390244 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05050505051 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.75116612262 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69859596109 2.65546596893 102% => OK
Unique words: 105.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.530303030303 0.547539520022 97% => OK
syllable_count: 281.7 283.868780488 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => 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: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 28.0 22.4926829268 124% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 82.1303096007 43.030603864 191% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.857142857 112.824112599 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.2857142857 22.9334400587 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.57142857143 5.23603664747 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 1.69756097561 236% => 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: 0.0 4.09268292683 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.3293630977 0.215688989381 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.143264924524 0.103423049105 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.134278758767 0.0843802449381 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.250638104675 0.15604864568 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.174496252634 0.0819641961636 213% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 13.2329268293 125% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.98 61.2550243902 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.8 10.3012195122 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.31 11.4140731707 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.61 8.06136585366 107% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 40.7170731707 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.4329268293 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.9970731707 120% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.