school expenditure and the proportion of students who gained higher education diplomas and degrees in Singapore from 2000 to 2012
The bar chart illustrates the total spending on boys and girls schools in Singapore between 2000 and 2012. The pie chart compares the percentage of students in higher education in Singapore who gained diplomas and degrees in 2000 and 2012.
Overall, it is clear that total school expenditure rose over the period. In addition, a higher proportion of students gained diplomas compared with those who were awarded degrees.
In Singapore, $9 million was spent on boys schools in 2000. This figure rose steadily to $20 million and $26 million in 2004 and 2008, respectively. In 2012, spending reached a peak of $33 million. In contrast, the expenditure on girls schools was lower. From a total of $7 million in 2000, however, spending on schools for girls also saw a steady increase, reaching a peak of $20 million at the end of the period.
There was an increase in the proportion of higher education students in Singapore who gained degrees. The percentage rose from 27% in 2000 to 32% in 2012, whereas the proportion of those who graduated with diplomas decreased from 73% in 2000 to 68% in 2012.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 14, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...o were awarded degrees. In Singapore, million was spent on boys schools in 200...
^^
Line 5, column 16, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a million'.
Suggestion: a million
...were awarded degrees. In Singapore, million was spent on boys schools in 2000. Thi...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 267, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...irls schools was lower. From a total of million in 2000, however, spending on sc...
^^
Line 7, column 260, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...reased from 73% in 2000 to 68% in 2012.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, so, whereas, in addition, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 33.7804878049 118% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 3.97073170732 151% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 907.0 965.302439024 94% => OK
No of words: 186.0 196.424390244 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.87634408602 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.69299088775 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6857246924 2.65546596893 101% => OK
Unique words: 88.0 106.607317073 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.47311827957 0.547539520022 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 253.8 283.868780488 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 8.94146341463 123% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.4926829268 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.6880979192 43.030603864 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.4545454545 112.824112599 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.9090909091 22.9334400587 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.72727272727 5.23603664747 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 1.69756097561 236% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 3.70975609756 189% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
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: 0.557609153259 0.215688989381 259% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.204990187917 0.103423049105 198% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.159503558074 0.0843802449381 189% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.363071882144 0.15604864568 233% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.157981104403 0.0819641961636 193% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.0 13.2329268293 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 72.16 61.2550243902 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 10.3012195122 70% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.73 11.4140731707 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.4 8.06136585366 92% => OK
difficult_words: 35.0 40.7170731707 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.4329268293 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.9970731707 76% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.0658536585 63% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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.