Trung Đức The graph below shows the percentage of part-time workers in each country of the United Kingdom in 1980 and 2010. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

Trung Đức The graph below shows the percentage of part-time workers in each country of the United Kingdom in 1980 and 2010.

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The graph illustrates how much percentage of workers who are employed part-time in per country of United Kingdom.
Overall, citizens who worked part-time in Wales both 1980 and 2010 were relatively crowded. In contrast, part-time laborer in Northern Ireland were the least popular.
According to analysis, Wales is one of the countries reported to have the largest number of part-time workers. It generated many part-time employees and occupied over 30% in both 1980 and 2010. In addition, although England has not created the same Wales, it brought out temporary workers of approximately 30%. Finally, Northern Ireland and Scotland were two countries with rates relatively average. It just produced part-time workers of roughly 20%. These two countries are relatively low compared to Wales and England.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"how much percentage of workers who are employed part-time in per country of United Kingdom" -> "the percentage of workers employed part-time in each country of the United Kingdom"
Explanation: The phrase "how much percentage" is awkward and incorrect; "the percentage" is more precise. "In per country" is also incorrect; "in each country" clarifies the meaning.
"citizens who worked part-time in Wales both 1980 and 2010 were relatively crowded" -> "citizens who worked part-time in Wales in both 1980 and 2010 were relatively numerous"
Explanation: The term "crowded" is inappropriate in this context; "numerous" better conveys the idea of a large number of workers. The addition of "in" before "both" clarifies the time frame.
"part-time laborer in Northern Ireland were the least popular" -> "part-time laborers in Northern Ireland were the least prevalent"
Explanation: "Laborer" should be pluralized to "laborers" for grammatical consistency. "Least popular" is vague; "least prevalent" is more precise in describing the workforce statistics.
"According to analysis" -> "According to the analysis"
Explanation: Adding "the" specifies that a particular analysis is being referenced, enhancing clarity.
"Wales is one of the countries reported to have the largest number of part-time workers" -> "Wales is one of the countries with the highest number of part-time workers"
Explanation: "Reported to have" is vague; "with" provides a more direct and assertive statement. "Highest" is also more precise than "largest" in this context.
"It generated many part-time employees and occupied over 30% in both 1980 and 2010" -> "It accounted for over 30% of part-time employees in both 1980 and 2010"
Explanation: "Generated many" is informal; "accounted for" is more precise and formal. The phrase "occupied over 30%" is also awkward; "accounted for" clarifies the relationship between Wales and the percentage.
"although England has not created the same Wales" -> "although England has not achieved the same level as Wales"
Explanation: "Created the same" is unclear; "achieved the same level as" provides a clearer comparison and maintains an academic tone.
"it brought out temporary workers of approximately 30%" -> "it produced approximately 30% of temporary workers"
Explanation: "Brought out" is informal; "produced" is more appropriate in an academic context. The phrase "of temporary workers" clarifies what the percentage refers to.
"were two countries with rates relatively average" -> "were two countries with relatively average rates"
Explanation: The phrase "rates relatively average" is awkward; "relatively average rates" is a more natural word order.
"It just produced part-time workers of roughly 20%" -> "It produced approximately 20% of part-time workers"
Explanation: "Just" is informal and unnecessary; "approximately" is a more precise term. The rephrasing clarifies the relationship between the percentage and part-time workers.
"These two countries are relatively low compared to Wales and England" -> "These two countries have relatively low rates compared to Wales and England"
Explanation: "Are relatively low" is vague; specifying "have relatively low rates" clarifies the context and maintains an academic tone.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5

Explanation: The essay generally addresses the task. The essay provides an overview of the main features of the graph, but it does not present a clear overview of the main trends. The essay also presents some key features, but it does not adequately cover them. For example, the essay states that Wales had the largest number of part-time workers, but it does not provide any specific data to support this claim.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clearer overview of the main trends in the graph. For example, the essay could state that the percentage of part-time workers increased in all four countries between 1980 and 2010. The essay could also be improved by providing more specific data to support its claims. For example, the essay could state that the percentage of part-time workers in Wales increased from 30% in 1980 to 35% in 2010. Finally, the essay could be improved by using more precise language. For example, instead of saying that Wales had the largest number of part-time workers, the essay could say that Wales had the highest percentage of part-time workers.

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 the data from different countries, the connections between ideas are not always clear, leading to confusion. The use of cohesive devices is inadequate and at times inaccurate, which affects the clarity of the comparisons being made. Additionally, the paragraphing is present but not effectively utilized, as the ideas within paragraphs do not flow logically.

How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on clearly structuring the essay with distinct paragraphs that each contain a central idea. Using a wider range of cohesive devices correctly will help to create logical connections between sentences and paragraphs. Additionally, ensuring that comparisons are explicitly stated and logically sequenced will improve the overall progression 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 graph, the vocabulary used is basic and repetitive, lacking sophistication. There are noticeable errors in word choice, such as "crowded" to describe part-time workers, which is inappropriate in this context. Additionally, phrases like "generated many part-time employees" and "brought out temporary workers" indicate a lack of precision and control over lexical choices. Spelling and word formation errors are present, such as "laborer" instead of "workers," which may cause some difficulty for the reader.

How to improve: To enhance lexical resource, the writer should aim to use a wider range of vocabulary, including more precise and contextually appropriate terms. Incorporating less common lexical items and ensuring correct collocations would improve clarity and sophistication. Additionally, proofreading for spelling and word formation errors can help avoid misunderstandings and enhance overall communication.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of grammatical structures, primarily relying on simple sentence forms. While there are attempts at complex sentences, they often lack accuracy, leading to frequent grammatical errors that can cause some difficulty for the reader. For example, phrases like "citizens who worked part-time in Wales both 1980 and 2010 were relatively crowded" are awkward and unclear. Additionally, the use of terms such as "laborer" instead of "workers" is inappropriate in this context. Overall, while the essay communicates the main ideas, the grammatical inaccuracies hinder clarity and coherence.

How to improve: To enhance the grammatical range and accuracy, the writer should focus on the following strategies:

Expand Sentence Variety: Incorporate more complex sentences and varied structures to demonstrate a wider range of grammatical forms.
Proofreading for Errors: Carefully review the essay for grammatical mistakes and awkward phrasing to improve clarity.
Use Appropriate Vocabulary: Ensure that word choices are suitable for the context, avoiding terms that may confuse the reader.
Practice Complex Structures: Engage in exercises that focus on the correct formation of complex sentences, including subordinate clauses and varied conjunctions.

Bài sửa mẫu

The graph illustrates the percentage of part-time workers in each country of the United Kingdom in 1980 and 2010. Overall, citizens working part-time in Wales in both 1980 and 2010 represented a significant proportion of the workforce. In contrast, part-time employment in Northern Ireland was the least prevalent.

According to the analysis, Wales is one of the countries with the highest number of part-time workers. It accounted for over 30% of the workforce in both 1980 and 2010. In addition, although England did not match the figures of Wales, it still had a notable percentage of approximately 30% of part-time workers. Finally, Northern Ireland and Scotland had relatively average rates, each producing roughly 20% of part-time workers. These two countries’ figures are considerably lower compared to those of Wales and England.