The table shows the production of milk annually in four countries in 1990, 2000 and 2010. The information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.
The table delivers statistics about milk production in every year within four given nations, measured in litres, in three years: 1990, 2000 and 2010.
Looking from an overall perspective, it is readily apparent that Netherlands held the highest production outcome of four countries throughout all given years, whereas Guatemala produced the smallest amount of milk. In addition, milk manufacture in Australia witnessed a significant drop while Tanzania and Guatemala experienced noticable upward trends in 20 years.
In 1990, Netherlands manufactured approximately 11,3 million litres of milk while this number of Guatemala only stood at 26 thousand. Moving to 2000, both Netherlands and Austrlia had a small dip in milk production figures, which decreased for approximately 107-141 litres of milk. In contrast, Tanzania and Guatemala rose at a speedy rate.
In 2010, Netherlands dairy production peaked at about 11,5 million litres. This figure of Australia, in the other hand, went down to 9,1 million. Interestingly, Guatermala’s milk manufacture had a threefold increase compared to its statistic in 1990. Furthermore, Tanzania shared the same trend, however at a slower rate.
- The charts show world pineapple exports by the top three pineapple producing countries in 2009 and 2019 and a breakdown of the cost to the consumer of each pineapple in 2019 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make c 89
- Directors of large organizations earn much higher salaries than ordinary employees do Some people think it is necessary but others hold that it is unfair Discuss both views and give your own opinions 84
- DRIVING TEST PASS RATES 11
- Studies suggest that many teenagers these days prefer socialising online to meeting one another in person Why do you think this is the case What measures could be taken to encourage teenagers to spend more time meeting one another in person Give reasons f 84
- Mobile phone and the internet could have many benefits for old people However this age group uses technology the least What are the benefits for old people of using mobile phones and the internet How can we encourage them to use this new technology 61
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, look, whereas, while, in addition, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 1.0 7.0 14% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 33.7804878049 92% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1016.0 965.302439024 105% => OK
No of words: 178.0 196.424390244 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.70786516854 4.92477711251 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.65262427087 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07356259442 2.65546596893 116% => OK
Unique words: 118.0 106.607317073 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.662921348315 0.547539520022 121% => OK
syllable_count: 291.6 283.868780488 103% => 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: 1.0 4.33902439024 23% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.4151874403 43.030603864 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.6 112.824112599 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8 22.9334400587 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.2 5.23603664747 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.182099423151 0.215688989381 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0690832347946 0.103423049105 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0667906396659 0.0843802449381 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125163912012 0.15604864568 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0599714661387 0.0819641961636 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.2329268293 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 61.2550243902 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.54 11.4140731707 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.09 8.06136585366 113% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 40.7170731707 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.4329268293 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.