The graph shows the percentage of male and female academic staff members across the faculties of a major university in 2012.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main feature and make comparisons where relevant.
The bar graph indicates how many people were part of the academic staff in the faculties of a major university in 2012, with a further classification by gender. As illustrated by the graph, the percentage of male academic staff members was significantly higher in faculties that deal with science and engineering compared with the percentage of female colleagues.
The analysis of data shows that the number of women working in education faculty of the university was considerably higher than that of men in the same field, (reaching around 75% and about 25% respectively). On the other hand, the percentage of men as engineer tutors was five times as much of female engineer tutors in the university in 2012 (men were approximately 85% whereas women were just under 20%). However, the proportion of male academic staff members was nearly as much as the female colleagues in the medical faculty (with the former peaked at around 45% and the latter at about 50%). In the business faculty though, the percentage of male staff was twice as much as female staff on the corresponding field. Specifically, around 60% of men and about 35% of women worked in the business faculty of the major university in 2012.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 176, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...classification by gender. As illustrated by the graph, the percentage of male aca...
^^
Line 1, column 265, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...taff members was significantly higher in faculties that deal with science and en...
^^
Line 1, column 276, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s was significantly higher in faculties that deal with science and engineering c...
^^
Line 3, column 13, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e of female colleagues. The analysis of data shows that the number of women w...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, whereas, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 7.0 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 33.7804878049 127% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 3.97073170732 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 999.0 965.302439024 103% => OK
No of words: 203.0 196.424390244 103% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92118226601 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.77462671648 3.73543355544 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83193397394 2.65546596893 107% => OK
Unique words: 95.0 106.607317073 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.467980295567 0.547539520022 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 320.4 283.868780488 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => 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: 29.0 22.4926829268 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 35.1800035967 43.030603864 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.714285714 112.824112599 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.0 22.9334400587 126% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.57142857143 5.23603664747 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 2.0 3.83414634146 52% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 1.69756097561 236% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.294942938838 0.215688989381 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.154745392173 0.103423049105 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.060950349797 0.0843802449381 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.258774938783 0.15604864568 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.042428682896 0.0819641961636 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.2329268293 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 61.2550243902 69% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.3012195122 142% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.85 11.4140731707 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.95 8.06136585366 99% => OK
difficult_words: 37.0 40.7170731707 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 11.4329268293 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.9970731707 124% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.0658536585 145% => 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.