The bar chart below shows the percentage participation of men in senior development in three companies between 1980 and the year 2010. Summarise the information by selecting and report in the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The bar chart below shows the percentage participation of men in senior development in three companies between 1980 and the year 2010.
Summarise the information by selecting and report in the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The given chart illustrates the proportion of men who participated in senior developing positions in 30 years since 1980. Generally, even though Apple counted the highest level in 1980, it was passed by IBM in 2010 that IBM counted the highest of 3 of the companies.
In first 10 years period from 1980, the level of Apple’s participation changed inconsiderably about 13% to 14%. Besides, Microsoft increased slightly in the period from 8% to over 10%. However, despite being at the bottom of the three in the first term, IBM dramatically changed at the end of the period and this company became the second highest of the proportions, particularly about 11% in 1990.
However, in the rest of the period, the proportions of the three companies significantly changed that IBM increased dramatically after 1990, accounted for 26% and it went off Apple to become the highest one, in order that Microsoft was the least of three. In the next 10 years, both IBM and Microsoft rose slightly, but Apple dropped about 3% from 1995 to 2000. Additionally, at the end of the remaining period, although Apple could retake its market by 6% increase, it was overcome by 2 companies remaining in 2010. After 10 years from 2000, both IBM and Microsoft grew about 30% and reached the top and the second level, 63% and 45% respectively. At the time, the race of 3 companies has changed a lot and it has shown the different changes of them.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"Generally, even though Apple counted the highest level in 1980, it was passed by IBM in 2010 that IBM counted the highest of 3 of the companies." -> "Generally, although Apple held the highest proportion in 1980, it was surpassed by IBM in 2010, which then held the highest proportion among the three companies."
Explanation: The original sentence is awkwardly phrased and contains a grammatical error. The suggested revision clarifies the meaning and corrects the verb tense, improving the flow and precision of the statement.
"In first 10 years period from 1980" -> "During the first 10-year period from 1980"
Explanation: The original phrase is grammatically incorrect and awkward. The suggested revision corrects the grammatical structure and clarifies the time period being referred to.
"the level of Apple’s participation changed inconsiderably about 13% to 14%" -> "Apple’s participation levels changed insignificantly by approximately 13% to 14%"
Explanation: The original phrase "inconsiderably about" is vague and informal. The revision uses "insignificantly by approximately" to provide a more precise and formal expression.
"However, despite being at the bottom of the three in the first term" -> "However, despite being at the lowest level among the three in the initial period"
Explanation: The original phrase "at the bottom of the three in the first term" is informal and imprecise. The revision uses "lowest level among the three in the initial period" to enhance formality and clarity.
"dramatically changed at the end of the period" -> "dramatically increased at the end of the period"
Explanation: The original phrase "changed" is vague and could refer to any type of change. The revision specifies "increased" to clearly indicate the direction of the change.
"this company became the second highest of the proportions" -> "this company became the second-highest in terms of proportion"
Explanation: The original phrase is awkwardly phrased. The revision clarifies the meaning and corrects the grammatical structure.
"the proportions of the three companies significantly changed that IBM increased dramatically" -> "the proportions of the three companies significantly changed, with IBM increasing dramatically"
Explanation: The original sentence structure is awkward and unclear. The revision corrects the punctuation and clarifies the subject of the sentence.
"in order that Microsoft was the least of three" -> "resulting in Microsoft being the lowest among the three"
Explanation: The original phrase "in order that" is overly formal and less common in academic writing. The suggested revision uses a more natural and precise phrase.
"both IBM and Microsoft rose slightly" -> "both IBM and Microsoft experienced slight increases"
Explanation: The original phrase "rose slightly" is somewhat informal and vague. The revision specifies "experienced slight increases" to enhance formality and clarity.
"it was overcome by 2 companies remaining" -> "it was surpassed by two companies"
Explanation: The original phrase "overcome by 2 companies remaining" is grammatically incorrect and unclear. The suggested revision corrects the grammar and clarifies the meaning.
"the race of 3 companies has changed a lot" -> "the competition among the three companies has significantly changed"
Explanation: The original phrase "the race of 3 companies has changed a lot" is informal and imprecise. The revision uses "competition among the three companies has significantly changed" to enhance formality and precision.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5

Explanation: The essay generally addresses the task, but the format is inappropriate in places. The essay does not provide a clear overview of the main trends in the data. Instead, it recounts details mechanically, with no clear overview. The essay also presents key features/bullet points, but inadequately covers them. There is a tendency to focus on details rather than the overall trends.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clear overview of the main trends in the data. For example, the essay could state that the percentage of men in senior development positions increased for all three companies between 1980 and 2010, but that IBM experienced the most significant increase. The essay could also highlight the key features of the data, such as the fact that Apple had the highest percentage of men in senior development positions in 1980, but that IBM overtook Apple in 2010. The essay should also avoid focusing on irrelevant details, such as the specific percentage changes for each company in each year. Instead, the essay should focus on the overall trends in the data.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0
Explanation: The essay presents information with some organization, but there is a noticeable lack of overall progression. While it attempts to describe the changes in participation levels among the companies, the structure is somewhat disjointed, making it difficult for the reader to follow the narrative clearly. The use of cohesive devices is inconsistent, leading to moments of confusion, and there are instances of repetition due to inadequate referencing. Paragraphing is present but not always logical, which detracts from the overall coherence of the essay.
How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on creating a clearer structure with distinct paragraphs that each cover a specific aspect of the data. Using a wider range of cohesive devices effectively and ensuring that references are clear will help in maintaining logical connections between ideas. Additionally, summarizing key points more succinctly and avoiding repetition will improve the overall clarity and flow of the essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of vocabulary that is minimally adequate for the task. While there are attempts to use some less common vocabulary, inaccuracies in word choice and collocation are evident throughout the text. For example, phrases like "passed by IBM" and "counted the highest of 3 of the companies" are awkward and do not convey precise meanings. Additionally, there are noticeable errors in spelling and word formation, such as "inconsiderably" and "accounted for," which may cause some difficulty for the reader. Overall, the lexical resource is insufficient to convey the information clearly and effectively.

How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource score, the writer should focus on expanding their vocabulary and using more precise word choices. Practicing the use of synonyms and understanding collocations can help improve the naturalness of the language. Additionally, proofreading for spelling and grammatical errors will help to minimize inaccuracies. Engaging with a variety of texts and practicing paraphrasing can also aid in developing a more sophisticated vocabulary range.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of grammatical structures and attempts to use complex sentences, but these attempts often lack accuracy. There are frequent grammatical errors, such as incorrect verb forms and awkward phrasing, which can cause some difficulty for the reader. While the overall meaning is generally clear, the errors in grammar and punctuation detract from the clarity and coherence of the essay.
How to improve: To improve the grammatical range and accuracy, the writer should focus on the following areas:

Sentence Structure: Practice using a wider variety of sentence structures, including more complex sentences that are grammatically correct.
Grammar and Punctuation: Review the rules of grammar and punctuation to reduce errors. This includes subject-verb agreement, verb tense consistency, and proper use of commas and conjunctions.
Proofreading: After writing, take time to proofread the essay to catch and correct any mistakes before submission.
Practice: Regularly practice writing essays and seek feedback to identify common errors and areas for improvement.

Bài sửa mẫu

The given chart illustrates the proportion of men who participated in senior development positions over a 30-year period from 1980 to 2010. Generally, although Apple had the highest percentage in 1980, it was surpassed by IBM in 2010, which recorded the highest participation among the three companies.

In the first 10-year period from 1980, Apple’s participation changed insignificantly, rising from about 13% to 14%. Meanwhile, Microsoft experienced a slight increase during this time, growing from 8% to just over 10%. However, despite being the lowest among the three in the initial period, IBM made a dramatic change by the end of the decade, becoming the second highest with approximately 11% in 1990.

In the subsequent years, the proportions of the three companies changed significantly. IBM increased dramatically after 1990, accounting for 26%, and surpassed Apple to become the highest. Consequently, Microsoft remained the lowest of the three. In the next 10 years, both IBM and Microsoft rose slightly, while Apple dropped by about 3% from 1995 to 2000. Additionally, by the end of this period, although Apple managed to regain some ground with a 6% increase, it was still outperformed by the other two companies in 2010. After 2000, both IBM and Microsoft grew substantially, reaching 63% and 45% respectively, thus occupying the top two positions. Throughout this time, the competition among the three companies underwent significant changes, reflecting their varying levels of participation.