The chart below shows the total number of minutes (in billions) of telephone calls in the UK, divided into three categories, from 1995 – 2002.
The data given in the bar chart depict the total minutes of three different call type; namely local – fixed line, national and international – fixed line, and mobiles in the UK over a period of 8 years.
As can be seen from the graph, it is clearly evident that the number of minutes in local type oscillated significantly and ranked first out of three over the given period; whereas national and international and mobiles witnessed upward trends. The local one had its highest minute in 1999, while the rest ones stood at the highest points in 2002, despite slight fluctuation.
In 1995, people spent approximately 72 billion minutes in local – fixed line, compared with around 38 billion in national and international – fixed line and just 3 billion in mobiles. Then, there was a moderate increase in local type and reached its peak at 90 billion in 1999, which was the highest number of this chart. Besides, calls which were made inside and outside the UK and by mobile phone also went up gradually, at 50 billion and 13 billion respectively.
After that, there was a dramatic drop in local – fixed line from 1999 to 2002, the figure for this type reduced to its original one in 1995, at 72 billion minutes. However, it was still the highest number in the year 2002. Additionally, the number of minutes in national and international – fixed line shoot up sharply to just over two thirds in 2002. Similarly, mobile minutes surged approximately three fold from 13 billion to 45 billion between 199 and 2002.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-05-07 | Pham To Anh Dao | 73 | view |
| 2017-04-17 | theresa_trangnguyen | 67 | view |
- The chart below shows the total number of minutes (in billions) of telephone calls in the UK, divided into three categories, from 1995 – 2002. 73
- The range of technology available to people is increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. Others think it has an opposite effect. Discuss both views and give opinions. 78
- The charts below show the proportions of British students at one university in England who were able to speak other languages in addition to English, in 2000 and 2010. 61
- The charts below give information on the ages of the population of Yemen and Italy in 2000 and projections for 2050. 84
- The tables below give information about sales of Fairtrade-labelled coffee and bananas in 1999 and 2004 in five European countries. 67
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, first, however, if, similarly, so, still, then, third, whereas, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 6.8 191% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 9.0 5.60731707317 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 33.7804878049 136% => 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: 1267.0 965.302439024 131% => OK
No of words: 265.0 196.424390244 135% => OK
Chars per words: 4.78113207547 4.92477711251 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03470204552 3.73543355544 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55094339623 2.65546596893 96% => OK
Unique words: 135.0 106.607317073 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509433962264 0.547539520022 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 379.8 283.868780488 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.4926829268 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.5334230596 43.030603864 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.7 112.824112599 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.5 22.9334400587 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.4 5.23603664747 160% => OK
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 : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.268984346318 0.215688989381 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.119131295993 0.103423049105 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0424274634628 0.0843802449381 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.175350625271 0.15604864568 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0465635986263 0.0819641961636 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.2329268293 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 62.01 61.2550243902 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.74 11.4140731707 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.55 8.06136585366 94% => OK
difficult_words: 44.0 40.7170731707 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 11.4329268293 157% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.9970731707 113% => 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.