The bar chart shows the hours per week that teenagers spend doing certain activities in Chester from 2002 to 2007.
The chart describes the hours per week spent by teenagers for doing various activities in Chester from 2002 to 2007.
Overall, watching television was popular in those five years (from 2002 to 2007), which was highest compared to different activities. Meanwhile, less hours accounted for bowling.
Categorically speaking, in 2002, 6 hours spent in going to pubs or discos. The amount was increasing year by year and remained stable from 2004 to 2006 and reached at almost 17 hours. Teenagers spent around 6 ours for shopping in the starting year and that figure went up to 15 hours in 2006 and 2007. For homework and sport, spending hours were falling from 11 hours and 10 hours to 7 hours and 2 hours respectively, between 2002 and 2007. Teenagers watched DVDs for 10 hours in 2002, which rose to approximately 17 hours in 2004 and fell by 7 hours in 2007. For bowling, teenagers spent almost the same hours throughout the 6 year period.
In contrast, 25 hours spent by teenagers for watching television. The figure went upward to reach a peak almost 37 hours in the year 2007.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 144, Rule ID: LESS_DOLLARSMINUTESHOURS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer hours'?
Suggestion: fewer hours
...red to different activities. Meanwhile, less hours accounted for bowling. Categorically...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 144, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun hours is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...red to different activities. Meanwhile, less hours accounted for bowling. Categor...
^^^^
Line 5, column 600, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... For bowling, teenagers spent almost the same hours throughout the 6 year period....
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, 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 : 10.0 6.8 147% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 33.7804878049 98% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 898.0 965.302439024 93% => OK
No of words: 188.0 196.424390244 96% => OK
Chars per words: 4.77659574468 4.92477711251 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.70287850203 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58111941914 2.65546596893 97% => OK
Unique words: 95.0 106.607317073 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.505319148936 0.547539520022 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 224.1 283.868780488 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.2 1.45097560976 83% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 8.94146341463 123% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.2360018069 43.030603864 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 81.6363636364 112.824112599 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0909090909 22.9334400587 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.0 5.23603664747 38% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.355995135846 0.215688989381 165% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.158294403532 0.103423049105 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.147961394854 0.0843802449381 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.271242599517 0.15604864568 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.186883589435 0.0819641961636 228% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.6 13.2329268293 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 88.06 61.2550243902 144% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 5.2 10.3012195122 50% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 10.15 11.4140731707 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.34 8.06136585366 91% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 40.7170731707 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.4329268293 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => 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.