The three pie charts provided compare the differences in the expenditure of an individual United King school per year in 1981, 1991 and 2001.
Analysing the pie charts, it is apparent from the data supplied that this school spent most their budget on teachers' salaries regardless of which years whereas insurance had a contrast tendency. Furthermore, the spending on other workers' salaries and resources such as books dropped throughout the period while furniture and equipment were spent less.
With regards to the higher expenditures, it can be noticed easily that teacher's salaries made up of the largest percentages in all three years (1981, 1991 and 2001) accounting for an average of half of the school's payment. By contrast, the percentage of school's budget used for other workers' wages contributing to over a quarter of overall expenditure in 1981 but it then fell gently 13% and reached 15% in 2001,
When it comes to other categories, this school spent their money less on insurances although its figures had increased slightly throughout the year which attributes to a very small proportion in both 1981 and 1991 before rising to 8% in 2001. In addition, the percentages of expenditures on resources as well furniture and equipment showed some fluctuation during the same period. While resources' spending reached its peak at a fifth of overall expenditures before dropping down to 9% in 2001, furniture and equipment's figures hit its highest point of 23% in 2001 after seeing a significant decline in 1991 and just represented one in twenty of the total proportion.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 143, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...school per year in 1981, 1991 and 2001. Analysing the pie charts, it is apparent...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 205, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'schools'' or 'school's'?
Suggestion: schools'; school's
...ccounting for an average of half of the schools payment. By contrast, the percentage of...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, if, so, then, well, whereas, while, in addition, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 6.8 147% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 5.60731707317 232% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 33.7804878049 136% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 3.97073170732 201% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1326.0 965.302439024 137% => OK
No of words: 258.0 196.424390244 131% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13953488372 4.92477711251 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00778971557 3.73543355544 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81865837695 2.65546596893 106% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 106.607317073 142% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.585271317829 0.547539520022 107% => OK
syllable_count: 382.5 283.868780488 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => 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: 36.0 22.4926829268 160% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 98.734854173 43.030603864 229% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 189.428571429 112.824112599 168% => OK
Words per sentence: 36.8571428571 22.9334400587 161% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.5714285714 5.23603664747 202% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.246342779973 0.215688989381 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.116574594524 0.103423049105 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0849762575687 0.0843802449381 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167155583222 0.15604864568 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0832122988919 0.0819641961636 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 21.2 13.2329268293 160% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.4 61.2550243902 71% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 10.3012195122 157% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.12 11.4140731707 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.34 8.06136585366 116% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 40.7170731707 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.4329268293 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 16.4 10.9970731707 149% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.