The diagram gives information about the rate of pupils who calculated the high score for separate factors at one university during the years 2000, 2005, and 2010. Overall, electronic resources surged dramatically; meanwhile, a substantial decrease in the range of modules offered occurred in these years.
On the one hand, the percentage of learners who rated high points for electronic resources was approximately 45% in 2000, and then it soared sharply up to 72% and 88% in 2005 and 2010, respectively. Besides that, teaching quality was also one of the factors, which was responded well by students, increasing from 65% to 69% in 2000 and 2010 accordingly.
On the other hand, some categories, like buildings/teaching facilities, and print resources, maintained stability for good ratings during the three years; even if the rate of the students changed, it only fluctuated 1% to 2% slightly. The range of modules offered changed during these years of surveys. In 2000, the rate of students for the factor was very low at only about 32%; however, by 2005 and 2010, this declined more steeply by about 30% to 27%, consequently.
In conclusion, the university needs to maintain its advantages, which its learners highly value. Moreover, given the factors for which pupils voted negative points, the school should research the reasons why students gave negative responses in these categories and plan the new methods to improve the problems.
- Some believe that people should make efforts to fight climate change while others think it is better to learn to live with it Discuss both views and give your own opinion 73
- IELTS writing task 1 the recycling process of plastics 81
- The bar chart below shows the amount of money invested in each category from five organisations 60
- The line graph below shows the land used for organic crops in two countries between 1985 and 2010 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The diagram below shows the process for recycling plastic bottles Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, besides, consequently, however, if, moreover, so, then, well, while, in conclusion, on the other hand
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: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 9.0 5.60731707317 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 33.7804878049 115% => 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: 1221.0 965.302439024 126% => OK
No of words: 232.0 196.424390244 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26293103448 4.92477711251 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.90276135726 3.73543355544 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90026637323 2.65546596893 109% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 106.607317073 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.603448275862 0.547539520022 110% => OK
syllable_count: 351.0 283.868780488 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.33902439024 161% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.482926829268 621% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.4926829268 111% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.4302476352 43.030603864 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.666666667 112.824112599 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7777777778 22.9334400587 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.3333333333 5.23603664747 255% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
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: 0.136391259394 0.215688989381 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.055882694961 0.103423049105 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0604813034439 0.0843802449381 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.083294312849 0.15604864568 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0302806361666 0.0819641961636 37% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.2329268293 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 61.2550243902 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.3012195122 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 11.4140731707 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.23 8.06136585366 114% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 40.7170731707 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.4329268293 127% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.9970731707 109% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, besides, consequently, however, if, moreover, so, then, well, while, in conclusion, on the other hand
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: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 9.0 5.60731707317 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 33.7804878049 115% => 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: 1221.0 965.302439024 126% => OK
No of words: 232.0 196.424390244 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26293103448 4.92477711251 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.90276135726 3.73543355544 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90026637323 2.65546596893 109% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 106.607317073 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.603448275862 0.547539520022 110% => OK
syllable_count: 351.0 283.868780488 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.33902439024 161% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.482926829268 621% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.4926829268 111% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.4302476352 43.030603864 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.666666667 112.824112599 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7777777778 22.9334400587 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.3333333333 5.23603664747 255% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
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: 0.136391259394 0.215688989381 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.055882694961 0.103423049105 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0604813034439 0.0843802449381 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.083294312849 0.15604864568 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0302806361666 0.0819641961636 37% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.2329268293 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 61.2550243902 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.3012195122 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 11.4140731707 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.23 8.06136585366 114% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 40.7170731707 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.4329268293 127% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.9970731707 109% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.