The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by local authorities in Someland in 1980, 1990 and 2000.

The pie charts illustrate how much the expenditure converts by local governments in Someland in three years 1980,1990 and 2000.
Overall, people spent the largest portion of their consumption on Higher education. While there was an upward trend in expenses on higher education, environmental services and transit, the opposite pattern was seen in the cost for the remaining categories.
In 1980, Higher education had the highest percentage with 35%. After 10 years, this number rose to 45% before dropping minimally by only one in twenty at the end of the period. Similarly, the cost for transportation experienced a slight growth from 16% in 1980 to 22% in 2000. Meanwhile, the figure for environmental services stood at 4% in the first period and remained almost unchanged in 1990 before doubling at 9% in the next 10 years.
On the other hand, there was a gradual decrease in expenses for K–12 education and other over the periods. To begin with, other comprised 6 % and K–12 education made up a quarter of spending but this figure declined dramatically, at only 1% and 18% respectively in 2000. Besides, although there was a moderate rise between 1980 and 1990, the expenditure on health and sources fell suddenly in 2000, at only 10%.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"The pie charts illustrate how much the expenditure converts by local governments in Someland in three years 1980,1990 and 2000." -> "The pie charts illustrate the allocation of expenditure by local governments in Someland over three years: 1980, 1990, and 2000."
Explanation: The original phrase "how much the expenditure converts" is unclear and grammatically incorrect. The revised version clarifies that the charts show the allocation of expenditure, providing a more accurate and formal description.
"people spent the largest portion of their consumption" -> "the largest proportion of expenditure was allocated to"
Explanation: The original phrase "people spent the largest portion of their consumption" is vague and informal. The revised phrase "the largest proportion of expenditure was allocated to" is more precise and appropriate for an academic context, specifying the type of expenditure.
"While there was an upward trend in expenses on higher education, environmental services and transit," -> "While there was an upward trend in expenditure on higher education, environmental services, and transit,"
Explanation: The original phrase is grammatically incomplete. Adding a comma after "services" corrects the grammatical structure and maintains the list of items in a formal style.
"the opposite pattern was seen in the cost for the remaining categories" -> "the opposite pattern was observed in the expenditure for the remaining categories"
Explanation: Replacing "cost" with "expenditure" aligns with the formal academic tone, and "observed" is a more precise verb choice than "seen" in this context.
"Higher education had the highest percentage with 35%" -> "Higher education accounted for the largest proportion, 35%"
Explanation: "Accounted for" is more precise and formal than "had the highest percentage," and using "proportion" instead of "percentage" enhances the academic tone.
"this number rose to 45% before dropping minimally by only one in twenty at the end of the period" -> "this proportion increased to 45% before decreasing marginally by only 1% at the end of the period"
Explanation: "Decreasing marginally" is more precise than "dropping minimally," and specifying "by only 1%" clarifies the extent of the decrease.
"the figure for environmental services stood at 4% in the first period and remained almost unchanged in 1990 before doubling at 9% in the next 10 years" -> "the proportion for environmental services remained at 4% in the first period, remained relatively unchanged in 1990, and doubled to 9% over the subsequent 10 years"
Explanation: "Remained relatively unchanged" is more precise than "remained almost unchanged," and specifying "doubled to 9%" clarifies the extent of the increase.
"there was a gradual decrease in expenses for K–12 education and other over the periods" -> "there was a gradual decline in expenditure for K–12 education and other categories over the periods"
Explanation: "Decline" is more specific and formal than "decrease," and "categories" is a more precise term than "other."
"this figure declined dramatically, at only 1% and 18% respectively in 2000" -> "this proportion declined significantly, to 1% and 18% respectively in 2000"
Explanation: "Significantly" is a more formal adverb than "dramatically," and specifying "to" instead of "at" corrects the grammatical structure.
"the expenditure on health and sources fell suddenly in 2000, at only 10%" -> "expenditure on health and sources decreased sharply to 10% in 2000"
Explanation: "Decreased sharply" is more precise and formal than "fell suddenly," and specifying "to 10%" clarifies the extent of the decrease.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay provides an overview of the main trends in the data, but it does not fully satisfy all the requirements of the task. The essay does not present a clear overview of the main trends, differences or stages. The essay also does not adequately highlight key features/bullet points. For example, the essay states that "there was a gradual decrease in expenses for K–12 education and other over the periods," but it does not provide any specific details about the decrease.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clearer overview of the main trends in the data. The essay could also be improved by highlighting key features/bullet points more effectively. For example, the essay could state that "the expenditure on K–12 education decreased from 25% in 1980 to 18% in 2000." The essay could also be improved by providing more specific details about the changes in spending. For example, the essay could state that "the expenditure on environmental services increased from 4% in 1980 to 9% in 2000."

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay presents a coherent overview of the pie charts, with a clear overall progression in the discussion of spending changes over the specified years. The information is arranged logically, and there is a clear central topic within each paragraph. However, there are instances of mechanical cohesion, such as the repetitive use of phrases like "in 1980," "in 1990," and "in 2000," which detracts from the overall fluidity of the writing. Additionally, some referencing is unclear, particularly in the transition between categories, which affects the clarity of the relationships between ideas. The paragraphing is present but could be improved for better logical flow.

How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer could vary the use of cohesive devices and ensure that transitions between ideas are smoother. Introducing more varied linking phrases and reducing redundancy in time references would help. Additionally, ensuring that each paragraph has a clear focus and that the relationships between different spending categories are explicitly stated would improve clarity. Lastly, refining the structure of paragraphs to ensure they logically build on one another would enhance overall coherence.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary relevant to the task, with some attempts to use less common lexical items. However, there are noticeable inaccuracies in word choice and collocation, such as "the expenditure converts" instead of "the expenditure categories" or "the expenditure distribution." Additionally, there are some errors in spelling and word formation, such as "K–12 education" and "sources," which may cause minor confusion for the reader. Overall, while the vocabulary used is sufficient for the task, it lacks the precision and control expected at higher band levels.
How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource score, the writer should focus on using more precise vocabulary and ensuring correct collocations. Practicing synonyms and varying word choice can help avoid repetition and improve the overall sophistication of the language. Additionally, careful proofreading to eliminate spelling and word formation errors will contribute to clearer communication.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, which is characteristic of a Band 6. While there are some good attempts at complex structures, the essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues that occasionally hinder clarity. For example, phrases like "the expenditure converts by local governments" and "the cost for transportation experienced a slight growth" could be more accurately expressed. Additionally, the use of commas is inconsistent, particularly in the listing of years and percentages, which affects the overall readability.
How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on improving grammatical accuracy and punctuation. This can be done by reviewing sentence structures for clarity and ensuring that complex sentences are used correctly. Additionally, practicing with a wider range of grammatical structures and ensuring that the majority of sentences are error-free will help in achieving a higher score. Regular feedback on writing can also aid in identifying and correcting recurring errors.

Bài sửa mẫu

The pie charts illustrate how much expenditure was allocated by local governments in Someland in the years 1980, 1990, and 2000.

Overall, the largest portion of spending was on higher education. While there was an upward trend in expenses for higher education, environmental services, and transportation, a contrasting pattern was observed in the costs for the remaining categories.

In 1980, higher education accounted for the highest percentage at 35%. After 10 years, this figure rose to 45% before dropping minimally by only 5% at the end of the period. Similarly, transportation expenses experienced slight growth from 16% in 1980 to 22% in 2000. Meanwhile, the figure for environmental services stood at 4% in the first period and remained almost unchanged in 1990 before doubling to 9% in the next 10 years.

On the other hand, there was a gradual decrease in expenses for K–12 education and other categories over the periods. To begin with, the ‘other’ category comprised 6%, while K–12 education made up a quarter of spending; however, this figure declined dramatically to only 1% and 18%, respectively, in 2000. Additionally, although there was a moderate rise between 1980 and 1990, expenditure on health and resources fell suddenly in 2000, dropping to only 10%.