The chart below shows the number of people employed in five types of work in one region of Australia in 2001 and 2008. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The chart below shows the number of people employed in five types of work in one region of Australia in 2001 and 2008.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The graph illustrates how many people working in five different majors of job in a area of Australia in 2001 and 2008.
Overall, sales was the most popular work while the number of people who participated in farming played the smallest part in this 5 types of work market both years. After 7 years, employees highly did sales and computing than others.
As the choice of work with the highest number of people employed, it was recorded a small rise between 2001 and 2008, just around 10,000 people. This figure in 2007 was double the total computing employees in this year (approximately 78.000) when in 2001, just almost 60,000 mens had jobs related to computers.
Although in 2001, the number of workers in accounting major was higher than others except sales with aroud 65,000 worker. It’s clearly to notice that, this figure fell after 7 years to almost 60,000 workers and became similar to the total of nurses. Same as Accounting, there were not many farmers in 2008 like 2001, respectively approximately to 20,000 and 29,000 people.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"working in five different majors of job" -> "working in five distinct fields of employment"
Explanation: "Majors of job" is an awkward and unclear phrase. "Fields of employment" is more precise and appropriate for academic writing.
"in a area of Australia" -> "in an area of Australia"
Explanation: "Area" should be "an area" to maintain grammatical correctness, as "an" is used before a vowel sound.
"sales was the most popular work" -> "sales was the most prevalent occupation"
Explanation: "Work" is too general and informal for this context. "Occupation" is more specific and formal.
"the number of people who participated in farming played the smallest part" -> "the number of people employed in farming was the smallest"
Explanation: "Participated in farming" is vague and informal. "Employed in farming" is more precise and appropriate for an academic context.
"employees highly did sales and computing than others" -> "employees were predominantly engaged in sales and computing compared to others"
Explanation: "Highly did" is grammatically incorrect and unclear. "Were predominantly engaged in" is grammatically correct and clearer.
"it was recorded a small rise" -> "there was a small increase"
Explanation: "It was recorded a small rise" is awkward and incorrect. "There was a small increase" is grammatically correct and clearer.
"just around 10,000 people" -> "approximately 10,000 people"
Explanation: "Just around" is informal and vague. "Approximately" is more precise and formal.
"mens had jobs related to computers" -> "men were employed in computing"
Explanation: "Mens" is a typographical error and "jobs related to computers" is informal. "Men were employed in computing" is grammatically correct and more formal.
"aroud" -> "around"
Explanation: Typographical error correction.
"It’s clearly to notice that" -> "It is clear that"
Explanation: "It’s" is a contraction and "clearly to notice that" is awkward. "It is clear that" is grammatically correct and more formal.
"this figure fell after 7 years to almost 60,000 workers" -> "this figure decreased by approximately 5,000 workers over the 7-year period"
Explanation: "Fell" is somewhat informal and vague. "Decreased by approximately 5,000 workers over the 7-year period" provides a more precise and formal description.
"became similar to the total of nurses" -> "paralleled the number of nurses"
Explanation: "Became similar to the total of nurses" is awkward and unclear. "Paralleled the number of nurses" is more concise and formal.
"Same as Accounting, there were not many farmers in 2008 like 2001" -> "Similarly, the number of farmers in 2008 was significantly lower than in 2001"
Explanation: "Same as Accounting" is informal and unclear. "Similarly" is more appropriate, and the rephrased sentence is clearer and more formal.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 4

Band Score: 4.0

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 data. The essay also confuses key features/bullet points with detail. For example, the essay states that "sales was the most popular work" but does not provide any specific data to support this claim. The essay also states that "employees highly did sales and computing than others" 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 data. The essay could also be improved by providing specific data to support the claims made. For example, the essay could state that "sales was the most popular work in both 2001 and 2008, with over 150,000 people employed in this sector in 2008." The essay could also state that "the number of people employed in computing increased significantly between 2001 and 2008, from around 60,000 to 78,000."

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 compare data from 2001 and 2008, the connections between ideas are not always clear, leading to a somewhat disjointed narrative. The use of cohesive devices is inadequate and at times inaccurate, which affects the clarity of the comparisons being made. Additionally, the paragraphing is inconsistent, with some ideas not being clearly separated into distinct paragraphs.
How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on organizing the essay into clear paragraphs, each with a distinct central topic. Improving the use of cohesive devices, such as conjunctions and referencing, would help clarify relationships between ideas. Additionally, ensuring that comparisons are clearly articulated and logically sequenced will improve the overall 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 it attempts to convey the main features of the data, the vocabulary used is basic and repetitive, with noticeable errors in word choice and spelling (e.g., "majors of job," "in a area," "mens," "aroud"). These errors can cause some difficulty for the reader in understanding the message. The use of phrases like "played the smallest part" and "highly did sales" indicates a lack of precision and control in lexical choices. Overall, the essay meets the minimum requirements but lacks the sophistication and variety expected at higher band levels.

How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on expanding their vocabulary and using more varied and precise language. This includes learning synonyms for common words, practicing the use of less common lexical items, and paying attention to collocations. Additionally, improving spelling and grammatical accuracy will enhance clarity. Engaging with more complex sentence structures and ensuring that word choices accurately reflect the intended meaning will also contribute to a stronger performance in the Lexical Resource criteria.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of grammatical structures and contains several errors that can cause difficulty for the reader. While there are attempts to use complex sentences, these are often inaccurate. The essay includes some correct simple sentences, but the frequent grammatical mistakes and issues with punctuation detract from overall clarity. For instance, phrases like "in a area" should be "in an area," and "mens" should be "men." Additionally, the sentence structure is sometimes awkward, which affects the flow of information.
How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on expanding their range of grammatical structures and ensuring accuracy in their usage. This can be done by practicing complex sentence forms and paying attention to subject-verb agreement and article usage. Additionally, proofreading for grammatical and punctuation errors before submission would help enhance clarity and coherence. Engaging with more varied sentence structures and ensuring that ideas are clearly expressed will also contribute to a stronger performance in this criterion.

Bài sửa mẫu

The graph illustrates the number of people employed in five different job sectors in a region of Australia in 2001 and 2008. Overall, sales was the most popular occupation, while the number of people engaged in farming represented the smallest segment of the job market in both years. After seven years, employment in sales and computing increased significantly compared to the other sectors.

As the occupation with the highest number of employees, sales saw a modest rise of around 10,000 people between 2001 and 2008. This figure in 2008 was double the total number of computing employees in that year (approximately 78,000), whereas in 2001, nearly 60,000 individuals were employed in computer-related jobs.

In 2001, the number of workers in the accounting sector was higher than in all other sectors, except for sales, with around 65,000 workers. However, it is notable that this figure fell to almost 60,000 workers after seven years, becoming similar to the total number of nurses employed. Similarly, the number of farmers in 2008 was significantly lower than in 2001, with approximately 20,000 compared to 29,000 people, respectively.