The graph below shows the percentage of urban/suburban and rural households in a European country that had Internet access between 1994 and 2004.
The bar graph compares the proportion of households from rural and urban/suburban areas who had access to the internet over the 5 consecutive years from 1999 to 2004 in a European country.
Overall, it can be seen that percentage of urban/suburban households who had access to the internet was higher than households from rural areas over the period and that the percentage rose for both areas.
In 1999, approximately 15% of households in urban/suburban areas had access to the internet and a mere 2% of people from villages had access, then the percentage for urban/suburban doubled in 2000 while for rural areas it rose by 2%. In 2001 the percentage in both areas rose and it constituted 40% for urban/suburban and about 10% for rural areas, it was the highest inequality over the period.
The figure for urban/suburban areas went up 15% for the next 4 years and comprised of 55% in 2004 while the percentage for rural areas rose significantly from 10% to 35% at the same period.
- The graph below shows average carbon dioxide (CO2) emission per person In the United Kingdom, Sweden and Portugal between 1967 and 2007Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 78
- The bar chart below shows the top ten countries for the production and consumtion of electricity in 2014 67
- The chart below shows the percentage of households in owned and rented accommodation in England and Wales between 1918 and 2011 67
- With a growing world population one of the most pressing issues is that of feeding such a large number of people Some people think that GM foods offer a viable solution to this problem To what extent do you agree or disagree 69
- The government is spending a lot of money to discover life on other planets. Some people think that government is wasting money and should spend more money addressing the problems of public. 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, then, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 33.7804878049 86% => 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: 825.0 965.302439024 85% => OK
No of words: 169.0 196.424390244 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.88165680473 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.60555127546 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0664820575 2.65546596893 115% => OK
Unique words: 76.0 106.607317073 71% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.449704142012 0.547539520022 82% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 249.3 283.868780488 88% => 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: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 5.0 8.94146341463 56% => 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: 33.0 22.4926829268 147% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 23.5202040807 43.030603864 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 165.0 112.824112599 146% => OK
Words per sentence: 33.8 22.9334400587 147% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.0 5.23603664747 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 3.70975609756 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.348487033035 0.215688989381 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.242491228643 0.103423049105 234% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100462757599 0.0843802449381 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.262805254026 0.15604864568 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.085840663433 0.0819641961636 105% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.5 13.2329268293 140% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.44 61.2550243902 76% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.3012195122 146% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.62 11.4140731707 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.8 8.06136585366 97% => OK
difficult_words: 27.0 40.7170731707 66% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 11.4329268293 166% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.2 10.9970731707 138% => OK
text_standard: 19.0 11.0658536585 172% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.