The chart below shows the percentage of river water in UK rivers that is classified as having good chemical quality between 1990 and 2002.
The given chart illustrates the changes in the proportion of river water in high quality in four different UK countries.
Overall, the percentage of good quality river water in Wales and Scotland showed a relatively stable trend, whereas the opposite was true for the figures for Northern Ireland and England, which showed some fluctuations.
From 1990 to 1998, Wales and Scotland had the best river water quality, which stood at exactly 95% and around 97% respectively. At this point, the figures for water quality in Wales dropped by roughly 5% to end in third place, while the percentage of that in Scotland showed a steady increase up to 98% by 2002.
Moreover, England had the worst river water quality, which was just over 80% in 1990. Its figure fluctuated slightly until 1998, after which it rose to exactly 90% in 2000 and 2002. Finally, the figure for Northern Ireland experienced the most significant alterations but generally increased by 5% by 2002, ended up being equal to the figure for Scotland.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-06-07 | Sachin0110 | 72 | view |
- Human activity has had a negative impact on plants and animals around the world Some people think that this cannot be changed while others believe actions can be taken to bring about a change Discuss both views and give your opinion 78
- The chart below shows the percentage of river water in UK rivers that is classified as having good chemical quality between 1990 and 2002 72
- The availability of entertainment such as video games on handheld devices are harmful to individual and to the socity they live in To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- Human activity has had negative impacts on plants and animals around the world Some people think that this cannot be changed while others believe actions can be taken to bring about a change Discuss both views and give your opinion 84
- The table below gives information about the use of different modes of transport in Shanghai in 1996, and one possible projection (high motorization scenario) for their use in 2020.Write a report for a university lecturer describing the information below. 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, if, moreover, so, third, whereas, 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: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 33.7804878049 92% => 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: 853.0 965.302439024 88% => OK
No of words: 170.0 196.424390244 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.01764705882 4.92477711251 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.61087313685 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58307640944 2.65546596893 97% => OK
Unique words: 99.0 106.607317073 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.582352941176 0.547539520022 106% => OK
syllable_count: 247.5 283.868780488 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => 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: 24.0 22.4926829268 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.8707145026 43.030603864 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.857142857 112.824112599 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2857142857 22.9334400587 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.57142857143 5.23603664747 145% => 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: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.282624574153 0.215688989381 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136384354371 0.103423049105 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0780270716157 0.0843802449381 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192062436007 0.15604864568 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0521999257959 0.0819641961636 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.2329268293 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 61.2550243902 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.3012195122 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 11.4140731707 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.06136585366 102% => OK
difficult_words: 37.0 40.7170731707 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.9970731707 105% => 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.