The charts give information concerning smartphone ownership as a percentage of population in Denmark & and by level of education from 2000 to 2010.
The bar charts represent the percentages of cellphone possession in terms of general Denmark populace and Danish who were categorized into five different educational degrees between 2000 and 2010
Overall, there was an upward trend in the proportion of mobile phone ownership in Denmark during the shown period. In addition, residents who held a Doctorate’s degree constituted the highest rate of handheld phone proprietary rights over the researched time.
In 2000, 40% of Danish possessed mobile devices, which was the lowest. From 2000 to 2004, the ratio of inhabitants holding digital items in this country increased gradually to roughly 52%. Similarly, the period between 2004 and 2010 experienced significant growth in this figure to peak at approximately 85% in the last surveyed year.
However, the figures for the second chart were totally different. In 2000, the proportion of undergraduates that owned cellular phones was the lowest (about 15%), compared to a three-fold rise to nearly 45% in 2010. In contrast, when people study higher levels, the gap between the figures in two years narrowed, and those were identical when Denmark dwellers achieved a Master’s degree (roughly 85%). On the contrary, the percentage for portable gears' right of possession with respect to Ph.D. degree holders in 2000 was greater than that in 2010, at nearly 98% and under 93% respectively.
- the graph shows information about the languages that 13 year old students in one English school chose to study 78
- The graphs show the changes in the UK steel industry between 1970 and 2000 84
- The charts give information concerning smartphone ownership as a percentage of population in Denmark and by level of education from 2000 to 2010 86
- Online shopping is increasing dramatically How could this trend affect our environment and the kinds of jobs required 56
- The diagrams below show the present building of a college and the plan for changes to the college site in the future 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, second, similarly, well, in addition, in contrast, on the contrary, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 33.7804878049 121% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1177.0 965.302439024 122% => OK
No of words: 219.0 196.424390244 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37442922374 4.92477711251 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.84690116678 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81133212769 2.65546596893 106% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 106.607317073 133% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.648401826484 0.547539520022 118% => OK
syllable_count: 337.5 283.868780488 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.33902439024 161% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => 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: 24.0 22.4926829268 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.8624751358 43.030603864 162% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.777777778 112.824112599 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3333333333 22.9334400587 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.6666666667 5.23603664747 204% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
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 : 3.0 1.13902439024 263% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.18821069982 0.215688989381 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0688881970645 0.103423049105 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0596540134603 0.0843802449381 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115543132117 0.15604864568 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0586824181841 0.0819641961636 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 13.2329268293 121% => 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: 14.16 11.4140731707 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.59 8.06136585366 119% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 40.7170731707 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.4329268293 127% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.9970731707 105% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.