The table below shows the percentage of students giving good rating for different aspects of a university in China in 2000, 2005, 2010.
The given chart provides the ranking of different categories voted by students in the university in China.
Overall, it is clear that while the percentage of Technical Quality, Print Resources, Electronic Resources rose significantly, the opposite was true for Range of modules offered. Also, the rating of Print Resources was the largest during the period.
According to the graph, in 2000, most of the students voting for Print Resources at 87% which was the highest number, compared with 63% of Technical Quality and 45% of Electronic Resources. In the following five years, this number increased while Technical Quality unchanged. Five years later, the proportion of Technical Quality and Print Resources rose gradually to 69% and 89% respectively, while Print Resources decreased a less roughly to 91% from 95% in 2010.
The percentage of Range of modules offered and Building/teaching facilities reached 33% and 75% respectively in 2000, and then the number of Range of modules offered fell to 26% from 30% in 2010. While the vote of students of Building/teaching facilities remained stable at 75% during.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-12-21 | Phung Quang Tuan | 73 | view |
- In today's competitive world, many families find it necessary for both parents to go out to work. While some say the children in these families benefit from the additional income, others feel they lack support because of their parents' absence 73
- The graph below shows the amounts of waste produced by three companies over a period of 15 years. 67
- The table below shows the percentage of students giving good rating for different aspects of a university in China in 2000, 2005, 2010. 73
- The table shows percentage of students giving good rating for different aspects of a university in China in 2000 2005 2010 69
- The pie charts show the average consumption of food in the world in 2008 compared to two countries; China and India. 61
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 197, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “While” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...s offered fell to 26% from 30% in 2010. While the vote of students of Building/teachi...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, so, then, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 33.7804878049 101% => 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: 941.0 965.302439024 97% => OK
No of words: 176.0 196.424390244 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.34659090909 4.92477711251 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.64232057368 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04048419881 2.65546596893 114% => OK
Unique words: 96.0 106.607317073 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.545454545455 0.547539520022 100% => OK
syllable_count: 275.4 283.868780488 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => 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: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.1222493148 43.030603864 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.625 112.824112599 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 22.9334400587 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.125 5.23603664747 60% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.141937537328 0.215688989381 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0659156757026 0.103423049105 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0538944637084 0.0843802449381 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100360173504 0.15604864568 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0528153071994 0.0819641961636 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.2329268293 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 61.2550243902 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.3012195122 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.75 11.4140731707 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.06136585366 109% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 40.7170731707 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => 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.