The two pie charts given compares the proportion of people who commuted to the university by five different means of transport over the course of 5 years from 2004 to 2009.
The two pie charts given compares the proportion of people who commuted to the university by five different means of transport, namely cars, bus, bicycle, walk and train over the course of 5 years from 2004 to 2009.
It is clear that the rate of people traveling by cars decreased significantly from 1994 to 2004 whereas the popularity of other methods observed an upward trend.
In 2004, over half of the visitors drove to the university about 51% while there was only 33% of that took a bus. Bike riders ranked only 9% of the total number, but this figure was still three-fold higher than those of walkers and train commuters, at 4% and 3% respectively.
After 5 years, the percentages of people decided to commute by bus rose sharply to 46 %. There was a similar pattern with the rate of bicycle users train passengers and pedestrians. It went slightly by 1 to 2%. In contrast, the percentage of people enjoying traveling by car to this university witnessed a spectacular drop to 28 percent.
- The percentage of tourists to Scotland who visited different attractions 11
- the are the advantages and disadvantages of taking English lessons with classmates form the same country 72
- The bar chart below shows the percentage of tourists to Thailand who visited four different attractions in Bangkok 69
- Some people think that all university students should study whatever they like. Others believe that they should only be allowed to study subjects that will be useful in the future, such as those related to science and technology. Discuss both views and gi 84
- The charts below show what UK graduate and postgraduate students who did not go into full-time work did after leaving college in 2008.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, still, whereas, while, in contrast
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 : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => 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: 174.0 196.424390244 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.74137931034 4.92477711251 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.63192868298 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71375032314 2.65546596893 102% => OK
Unique words: 115.0 106.607317073 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.66091954023 0.547539520022 121% => OK
syllable_count: 244.8 283.868780488 86% => 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: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
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: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.2353266168 43.030603864 124% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.125 112.824112599 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.75 22.9334400587 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.375 5.23603664747 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
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: 0.398611680854 0.215688989381 185% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.140416009699 0.103423049105 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.249532439708 0.0843802449381 296% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.254005980991 0.15604864568 163% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.311015696057 0.0819641961636 379% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.2329268293 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 61.2550243902 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.3012195122 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.21 11.4140731707 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.06136585366 104% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => 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.