The table and charts give information on the police budget for 2017 and 2018 in one area of Britain. The table shows where the money came from and the charts show how it was distributed.

The given table and charts provide data about the amount of money available allocated to the police in two continuous years. While the table illustrates the origins of the money, the charts show how it was allocated.
Overall, police were recapitalized more money compared to the previous year. Meanwhile, there was also an increase in money distributed to technology, in contrast, less budget was allocated to salaries. Notably, the percentage of money for buildings and transport remained the same.
Regarding the upper table, they witnessed a corresponding tendency. National and Other sources such as grants had a surge ranging from 0,3 to 0,5 million dollars, initially, they devoted 175,5m and 38m, respectively. In 2017, Local taxes contributed 91,2m to the police, this increased significantly to 102,3m in the subsequent years. All this resulted in an increase of approximately 15m in the police budget, which inherently was 304,7m.
Turning to the lower pie charts, there was a slight change over two years. Salaries of officers and staff, which comprised 75% of the budget at the beginning, plummeted to merely 70% in the following year. Conversely, were initially allocated 8% of the available money was technology, after that, they observed a surge of 6% in 2018. Ultimately, the figure for Buildings and transport remained stable over the period of two years at 14%.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"The given table and charts provide data about the amount of money available allocated to the police in two continuous years." -> "The provided tables and charts present data on the allocation of funds to the police over two consecutive years."
Explanation: "The given" is less formal and "continuous" is not the correct term when referring to years; "consecutive" is more precise. Additionally, "available allocated" is redundant; "allocation of funds" is more direct and formal.
"police were recapitalized more money" -> "the police received more funding"
Explanation: "Recapitalized" is incorrect in this context; "received more funding" is the correct term for describing an increase in financial resources.
"Meanwhile, there was also an increase in money distributed to technology, in contrast, less budget was allocated to salaries." -> "Meanwhile, there was also an increase in funding allocated to technology, whereas less was allocated to salaries."
Explanation: "Money distributed" is vague and informal; "funding allocated" is more precise. "In contrast" is replaced with "whereas" for a more formal conjunction.
"Notably, the percentage of money for buildings and transport remained the same." -> "Notably, the allocation for buildings and transport remained unchanged."
Explanation: "Percentage of money" is redundant; "allocation" is more direct and formal. "Remained the same" is also simplified; "remained unchanged" is more formal.
"Regarding the upper table, they witnessed a corresponding tendency." -> "Regarding the upper table, a corresponding trend was observed."
Explanation: "They witnessed" is informal and vague; "a corresponding trend was observed" is more precise and formal.
"National and Other sources such as grants had a surge ranging from 0,3 to 0,5 million dollars, initially, they devoted 175,5m and 38m, respectively." -> "National and other sources, including grants, saw a surge from 0.3 to 0.5 million dollars, initially allocating 175.5 million and 38 million dollars, respectively."
Explanation: "Had a surge" is less formal; "saw a surge" is more appropriate. "Initially, they devoted" is awkward and informal; "initially allocating" is more direct and formal.
"All this resulted in an increase of approximately 15m in the police budget, which inherently was 304,7m." -> "This resulted in an increase of approximately 15 million in the police budget, which totaled 304.7 million."
Explanation: "All this" is vague; "This" is more precise. "Inherently was" is awkward and unclear; "totaled" is straightforward and formal.
"Salaries of officers and staff, which comprised 75% of the budget at the beginning, plummeted to merely 70% in the following year." -> "Salaries for officers and staff, which initially comprised 75% of the budget, decreased to 70% in the subsequent year."
Explanation: "Plummeted to merely" is overly dramatic and informal; "decreased to" is more measured and formal. "At the beginning" is informal; "initially" is more suitable for academic writing.
"Conversely, were initially allocated 8% of the available money was technology, after that, they observed a surge of 6% in 2018." -> "Conversely, 8% of the budget was initially allocated to technology, and this increased to 6% in 2018."
Explanation: "Were initially allocated 8% of the available money was technology" is grammatically incorrect and unclear; the suggested revision clarifies the sentence structure and removes redundancy.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay adequately addresses the requirements of the task by providing an overview of the information presented in the table and charts. The essay highlights the key features of the data, such as the increase in the police budget and the changes in the allocation of funds. However, the essay does not fully extend the key features and some details are irrelevant or inaccurate. For example, the essay states that "the percentage of money for buildings and transport remained the same," but the charts show that the percentage for buildings and transport increased from 14% to 17%.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing more specific and accurate details about the data. For example, the essay could state that the police budget increased by 15 million pounds from 2017 to 2018. The essay could also provide more detailed information about the changes in the allocation of funds, such as the fact that the percentage of the budget allocated to salaries decreased by 5% while the percentage allocated to technology increased by 6%.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay presents information in a coherent manner, with a clear overall progression from the introduction to the body paragraphs. The writer attempts to organize the data logically, but there are instances where the flow of ideas could be improved. The use of cohesive devices is evident, but there are moments of mechanical cohesion, particularly in the transition between sentences and ideas. The referencing is not always clear, which can lead to some confusion about what is being discussed. Additionally, while paragraphs are used, their logical structure could be enhanced to better support the progression of ideas.

How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on enhancing the logical flow between ideas and ensuring that cohesive devices are used more naturally. Improving the clarity of referencing will help readers follow the argument more easily. Additionally, refining the paragraph structure to ensure that each paragraph clearly supports a central topic will contribute to better coherence and cohesion overall.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary suitable for the task. There are attempts to use less common vocabulary, such as "recapitalized," "surge," and "comprise," but some inaccuracies in word choice and collocation are present (e.g., "the amount of money available allocated" is awkwardly phrased). Additionally, there are errors in spelling and word formation, such as "were initially allocated 8% of the available money was technology," which disrupts the flow of information. While these errors do not completely impede communication, they do affect clarity and precision.

How to improve: To enhance the Lexical Resource score, the writer should focus on using a wider range of vocabulary with more precision and accuracy. This includes ensuring that less common lexical items are used correctly and that collocations are appropriate. Additionally, reducing errors in spelling and word formation will help improve overall clarity. Practicing the use of synonyms and varying sentence structures can also contribute to a more sophisticated lexical range.

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 score. While there are some attempts at using complex structures, the overall grammatical accuracy is inconsistent. Errors in grammar and punctuation are present, such as "recapitalized more money" (which is awkwardly phrased) and "were initially allocated 8% of the available money was technology" (which is a grammatical error). These errors occasionally hinder clarity, but the overall meaning is still communicated.

How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on improving grammatical accuracy and increasing the range of sentence structures. This can be done by practicing more complex sentence formations and ensuring that all sentences are grammatically correct. Additionally, proofreading for common errors in punctuation and sentence structure would help enhance clarity and coherence. Lastly, using more precise vocabulary and avoiding awkward phrases would contribute to a more polished essay.

Bài sửa mẫu

The given table and charts provide data about the amount of money allocated to the police in two consecutive years. While the table illustrates the sources of the funding, the charts depict how it was distributed.

Overall, the police received more funding compared to the previous year. Additionally, there was an increase in the budget allocated to technology; conversely, less funding was directed towards salaries. Notably, the percentage of the budget for buildings and transport remained unchanged.

Regarding the upper table, a corresponding trend was observed. National and other sources, such as grants, experienced a surge from $0.3 million to $0.5 million, with initial allocations of $175.5 million and $38 million, respectively. In 2017, local taxes contributed $91.2 million to the police budget, which increased significantly to $102.3 million in the following year. This resulted in an overall increase of approximately $15 million in the police budget, which amounted to $304.7 million.

Turning to the lower pie charts, there was a slight change over the two years. Salaries of officers and staff, which comprised 75% of the budget initially, decreased to only 70% in the subsequent year. Conversely, technology, which was initially allocated 8% of the available budget, saw an increase of 6% in 2018. Ultimately, the figure for buildings and transport remained stable over the two-year period at 14%.