The graph shows the percentage of male and female academic staff members across the faculties of a major university in 2012.
The bar chart illustrates the proportion of academic members of staff by gender throughout the faculties of a particular university in 2012.
It is clear that the percentage of male academics was higher than female academics in most faculties. In addition, engineering was the area which had the largest gender gap, while the opposite was true for medicine.
According to the chart, the percentages of male teaching staff in the business, engineering, law, and science faculties were higher than the proportions of female academics, while the opposite was true in the other faculties. Particularly, the figures for female academic staff were above 50% only in the faculties of arts, education and barely in medicine.
Looking at the highest column on the chart, more 80% of staff members in engineering faculty were male in comparison with just under 20% of the percentage of the female. On the other hand, with nearly 80%, the proportion of woman staff was approximately 3 times as much as the percentage of man staff in education faculty. Generally, the figures for man staff in engineering and woman staff in education were considerably higher than the other faculties.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...es of a particular university in 2012. It is clear that the percentage of male ...
^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...le the opposite was true for medicine. According to the chart, the percentages ...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rts, education and barely in medicine. Looking at the highest column on the cha...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
look, so, while, in addition, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 7.0 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 3.97073170732 176% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 987.0 965.302439024 102% => OK
No of words: 191.0 196.424390244 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16753926702 4.92477711251 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.71756304063 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91680838736 2.65546596893 110% => OK
Unique words: 92.0 106.607317073 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.48167539267 0.547539520022 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 316.8 283.868780488 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.45097560976 117% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.4926829268 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.0581128181 43.030603864 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.375 112.824112599 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.875 22.9334400587 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.875 5.23603664747 112% => OK
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: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.313750943319 0.215688989381 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.157302941341 0.103423049105 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0897738668037 0.0843802449381 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.213284964208 0.15604864568 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0612863475798 0.0819641961636 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.2329268293 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 61.2550243902 65% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.3012195122 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 11.4140731707 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.08 8.06136585366 100% => OK
difficult_words: 40.0 40.7170731707 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 11.4329268293 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.9970731707 102% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => 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.