The chart shows the proportion of renewable energy in total energy supply in 4 countries from 1997 to 2010.

The chart illustrates the rate of renewable energy in total energy use in autrailia, Sweden, Iceland, Turkey in 1997,2000,2010.
It is clear that Iceland supply in all time more than other nations. The opposite was true for Autralia and Sweaden. Turkey used didn’t change a lot.
The figure for Iceland stood at over 40 percents while Sweden made up only 6 percents. The renewable in Autralia more than Sweden 3 percents. From 1997 to 2000 saw a slightly increase at 41 in the numberous in Turkey and a significant growth on 60 in Iceland. Autralia was drop at 7 in 2000 compare to Sweden fluctuate around under 10 percent.
There was amount of over 30 renewable energy was supply in Turkey in 2010. Iceland was reach a peak in 2010 at 70, in comparison with Autralia hit the lowest account for 5. Sweden was 9 percents in 2010.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"autrailia" -> "Australia"
Explanation: Correcting the spelling error to "Australia" ensures the accuracy and professionalism of the text.
"Sweden, Iceland, Turkey" -> "Australia, Sweden, and Iceland"
Explanation: Adding "and" before "Iceland" corrects the grammatical structure, making the list more formal and coherent.
"supply in all time more than other nations" -> "consistently exceeded that of other nations"
Explanation: Replacing "supply in all time more than" with "consistently exceeded that of" provides a more precise and formal expression, suitable for academic writing.
"used didn’t change a lot" -> "exhibited little variation"
Explanation: "Exhibited little variation" is a more formal and precise way to describe the minimal changes in data over time.
"The figure for Iceland stood at over 40 percents" -> "The percentage of renewable energy in Iceland exceeded 40%"
Explanation: Changing "The figure for Iceland stood at over 40 percents" to "The percentage of renewable energy in Iceland exceeded 40%" corrects the grammatical error and enhances clarity.
"The renewable in Autralia more than Sweden 3 percents" -> "Renewable energy in Australia exceeded that of Sweden by 3%"
Explanation: This revision corrects the grammatical structure and adds clarity by specifying the comparison.
"numberous" -> "numerous"
Explanation: Correcting the spelling error from "numberous" to "numerous" maintains the professionalism of the text.
"Autralia was drop at 7" -> "Australia decreased to 7%"
Explanation: Replacing "Autralia was drop at 7" with "Australia decreased to 7%" corrects the spelling error and uses more precise language.
"fluctuate around under 10 percent" -> "fluctuated around 10%"
Explanation: Changing "fluctuate around under 10 percent" to "fluctuated around 10%" corrects the verb tense and removes the unnecessary preposition "under," making the sentence more direct and formal.
"amount of over 30 renewable energy was supply" -> "more than 30% of renewable energy was supplied"
Explanation: "More than 30% of renewable energy was supplied" corrects the grammatical structure and clarifies the meaning, making it more precise and formal.
"Iceland was reach a peak" -> "Iceland reached a peak"
Explanation: Correcting "was reach a peak" to "reached a peak" fixes the verb tense and grammatical agreement, enhancing the formal tone.
"hit the lowest account for 5" -> "reached its lowest level of 5%"
Explanation: "Reached its lowest level of 5%" is a more precise and formal way to express the decrease in percentage, replacing the awkward and unclear "hit the lowest account for 5".
"Sweden was 9 percents" -> "Sweden accounted for 9%"
Explanation: Changing "Sweden was 9 percents" to "Sweden accounted for 9%" corrects the grammatical structure and eliminates the unnecessary plural form of "percents".

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 4

Band Score: 4

Explanation: The essay attempts to address the task but does not cover all key features/bullet points. The essay does not provide a clear overview of the main trends in the chart. The essay also confuses key features/bullet points with detail. For example, the essay states that "Iceland supply in all time more than other nations" but does not provide any specific data to support this claim. The essay also states that "Turkey used didn’t change a lot" but does not provide any specific data to support this claim.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clear overview of the main trends in the chart. The essay could also be improved by providing specific data to support the claims made. For example, the essay could state that "Iceland had the highest proportion of renewable energy in total energy supply in all three years, with a figure of over 40% in 1997, 60% in 2000, and 70% in 2010." The essay could also state that "Turkey’s proportion of renewable energy in total energy supply remained relatively stable over the period, with a figure of around 30% in 1997, 41% in 2000, and 30% in 2010."

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 convey the data from the chart, the ideas are not clearly connected, leading to confusion. There is some use of cohesive devices, but they are often inadequate or inaccurately applied, resulting in a repetitive and unclear narrative. The 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 clearly structuring their paragraphs around central topics, ensuring each paragraph logically progresses from one idea to the next. Improving the accuracy and variety of cohesive devices will also help in creating smoother transitions between sentences and ideas. Additionally, proofreading for spelling and grammatical errors will improve clarity and professionalism in the writing.

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 it attempts to convey information about the chart, the vocabulary used is often basic and repetitive, with noticeable errors in spelling and word formation (e.g., "autrailia," "Sweaden," "didn’t change a lot"). These errors may cause some difficulty for the reader in understanding the intended message. The use of terms like "rate," "supply," and "energy" is appropriate, but the overall lexical resource lacks the variety and precision expected at higher band levels.
How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource, the writer should aim to incorporate a wider range of vocabulary, including less common lexical items related to the topic of renewable energy. Additionally, focusing on correct spelling and word formation will improve clarity. Practicing synonyms and varying sentence structures can also help convey precise meanings more effectively.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of grammatical structures, with several attempts at complex sentences that are often inaccurate. There are frequent grammatical errors, such as incorrect verb forms, punctuation issues, and misspellings (e.g., "autrailia," "Autralia," "Sweaden," "percents"). These errors can cause some difficulty for the reader in understanding the overall message. While the essay conveys some information about the chart, the inaccuracies in grammar and sentence structure detract from the clarity and coherence of the writing.
How to improve: To improve the grammatical range and accuracy, the writer should focus on the following:

Expand Sentence Structures: Practice using a wider variety of sentence structures, including more complex sentences that are grammatically correct.
Proofreading: Take time to proofread the essay to catch and correct spelling and punctuation errors.
Grammar Practice: Engage in targeted grammar exercises to strengthen understanding of verb forms, subject-verb agreement, and sentence construction.
Use of Connectors: Incorporate appropriate linking words and phrases to improve coherence and flow between sentences and ideas.
Seek Feedback: Consider getting feedback from a teacher or a peer to identify specific areas for improvement.

Bài sửa mẫu

The chart illustrates the rate of renewable energy in total energy use in Australia, Sweden, Iceland, and Turkey in 1997, 2000, and 2010. It is clear that Iceland supplied more renewable energy than the other nations at all times. The opposite was true for Australia and Sweden. Turkey’s usage did not change significantly.

The figure for Iceland stood at over 40 percent, while Sweden made up only 6 percent. The renewable energy in Australia was more than Sweden by 3 percent. From 1997 to 2000, there was a slight increase to 41 percent in Turkey, and a significant growth to 60 percent in Iceland. Australia dropped to 7 percent in 2000 compared to Sweden, which fluctuated around under 10 percent.

In 2010, Turkey supplied over 30 percent of renewable energy. Iceland reached a peak of 70 percent in 2010, in comparison with Australia, which hit the lowest at 5 percent. Sweden accounted for 9 percent in 2010.