he table below shows the results of surveys in 2005, 2010 and 2015 about McGill University. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. Write at least 150 words.

he table below shows the results of surveys in 2005, 2010 and 2015 about McGill University.
Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
Write at least 150 words.

The table illustrates the proportion of positive respondings being reviewed by students of McGill University for five specific features over a 10-year period,commencing in 2005.

Overall,there was an upward trend in almost examined aspects,meanwhile,Sports and Social facilities remained unchanged during the research time.In addition,Range of modules offered experienced a downtrend and it had the lowest optimistic assessment.
The percentage of good ratings for Library resources started at 86% in 2005,after which it showed a growth to 88% in 2010 ,before ending at 87% 5 years later.The figure for Teaching quality began at a lower point at 74% in 2005 ,then it fell down to 72% in 2010,before rising back to 78% in the end of the period.A significant improvement can be seen in the figure for Student services, which was given 54% great respondings in 2005,followed by a dramatic jump to 81% and 95% in 2010 and 2015 respectively.

By contrast,39% students gave good points for Range of modules offered in 2005,then the data for this aspect fell down to 31% in 2010 and continued to go down to 25% in the final year of the survey.Besides,Sports and Social facilities displayed a stability throughout the studied timeframe at 65%.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"the proportion of positive respondings" -> "the proportion of positive responses"
Explanation: "Respondings" is not a standard term in English; "responses" is the correct noun form that conveys the intended meaning.
"being reviewed by students of McGill University" -> "provided by students of McGill University"
Explanation: "Being reviewed" suggests an ongoing action that is not clearly relevant here. "Provided" indicates that the students are the source of the responses, which is more precise.
"for five specific features" -> "across five specific features"
Explanation: "Across" indicates a distribution over the features, which is more accurate than "for," which can imply a narrower focus.
"commencing in 2005" -> "beginning in 2005"
Explanation: "Beginning" is a more straightforward and commonly used term in academic writing than "commencing," which can sound overly formal.
"upward trend in almost examined aspects" -> "upward trend in nearly all examined aspects"
Explanation: "Nearly all" is clearer and more precise than "almost," which can be vague.
"remained unchanged during the research time" -> "remained constant throughout the study period"
Explanation: "Constant" is a more precise term than "unchanged," and "study period" is a more formal phrase than "research time."
"experienced a downtrend" -> "experienced a decline"
Explanation: "Decline" is a more commonly used term in academic contexts than "downtrend," which can sound informal.
"the lowest optimistic assessment" -> "the lowest positive assessment"
Explanation: "Positive" is a more precise term than "optimistic," which can imply a subjective viewpoint rather than an objective evaluation.
"good ratings for Library resources" -> "favorable ratings for library resources"
Explanation: "Favorable" is a more formal and precise term than "good," which is vague in academic writing.
"after which it showed a growth" -> "after which it exhibited growth"
Explanation: "Exhibited" is a more formal verb than "showed," enhancing the academic tone.
"fell down to 72%" -> "declined to 72%"
Explanation: "Declined" is a more formal and precise term than "fell down," which is colloquial.
"a significant improvement can be seen in the figure for Student services" -> "a significant improvement is evident in the data for student services"
Explanation: "Is evident" is more direct and assertive than "can be seen," which is passive and less formal.
"great respondings" -> "high levels of positive responses"
Explanation: "High levels of positive responses" is clearer and more academically appropriate than "great respondings."
"good points for Range of modules offered" -> "favorable evaluations for the range of modules offered"
Explanation: "Favorable evaluations" is a more formal and precise expression than "good points," which is vague.
"fell down to 31%" -> "declined to 31%"
Explanation: Again, "declined" is a more formal and precise term than "fell down."
"displayed a stability throughout the studied timeframe" -> "exhibited stability throughout the study period"
Explanation: "Exhibited" is a more formal verb than "displayed," and "study period" is more precise than "studied timeframe."

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6

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. It also does not adequately highlight key features/bullet points. For example, the essay states that "there was an upward trend in almost examined aspects," but it does not provide specific examples of these trends.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a more detailed overview of the main trends in the data. The essay could also be improved by highlighting key features/bullet points more clearly. For example, the essay could state that "the percentage of students who gave good ratings for Library resources increased from 86% in 2005 to 88% in 2010, before falling slightly to 87% in 2015." This would provide a clearer overview of the trend in Library resources.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay arranges information and ideas coherently, presenting a clear overall progression. The introduction effectively sets the context, and the body paragraphs provide a logical sequence of information regarding the survey results. However, while cohesive devices are used, there are instances of mechanical cohesion, such as repetitive phrases and transitions that may not enhance clarity. The referencing of features could be clearer, and paragraphing is present but not always logical, as some ideas could be better grouped together.

How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on using a wider range of cohesive devices more effectively, ensuring that transitions between sentences and paragraphs are smooth and logical. Additionally, improving the clarity of referencing (e.g., using synonyms or clearer pronouns) and ensuring that paragraphs are logically structured around central topics would strengthen the overall organization of the essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, with attempts to use less common vocabulary. However, there are inaccuracies in word choice and collocation, such as "positive respondings" instead of "positive responses" and "great respondings" instead of "great responses." There are also some errors in spelling and punctuation that do not impede communication but detract from the overall quality. For example, the phrase "meanwhile,Sports and Social facilities" lacks a space after the comma. The essay’s vocabulary allows for some flexibility and precision, but the errors prevent it from achieving a higher band score.

How to improve: To improve the lexical resource score, the writer should focus on using more precise and appropriate vocabulary, ensuring correct collocations and avoiding awkward phrases. Additionally, proofreading for spelling and punctuation errors would enhance clarity and professionalism. Expanding the range of vocabulary by incorporating more sophisticated and varied lexical items could also help achieve a higher score.

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 level. While there are some attempts at complex structures, the overall grammatical accuracy is inconsistent. There are noticeable errors in grammar and punctuation, such as "respondings" (which should be "responses"), and issues with comma placement that can lead to minor confusion in meaning. However, these errors do not significantly impede communication, allowing the reader to understand the main points being made.

How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on enhancing grammatical accuracy by proofreading for common errors and improving punctuation. Increasing the variety of sentence structures and ensuring that complex sentences are used correctly would also help. Additionally, using more precise vocabulary and avoiding awkward phrasing would contribute to a clearer and more professional tone.

Bài sửa mẫu

The table illustrates the proportion of positive responses from students of McGill University regarding five specific features over a 10-year period, commencing in 2005.

Overall, there was an upward trend in almost all examined aspects, while Sports and Social facilities remained unchanged during the research period. Additionally, the Range of modules offered experienced a downward trend, resulting in the lowest positive assessment. The percentage of good ratings for Library resources started at 86% in 2005, showing an increase to 88% in 2010, before ending at 87% five years later. The figure for Teaching quality began at a lower point of 74% in 2005, then fell to 72% in 2010, before rising back to 78% by the end of the period. A significant improvement can be seen in the figure for Student services, which received 54% positive responses in 2005, followed by a dramatic increase to 81% and 95% in 2010 and 2015, respectively.

In contrast, 39% of students rated the Range of modules offered positively in 2005; however, this figure declined to 31% in 2010 and continued to decrease to 25% in the final year of the survey. Furthermore, Sports and Social facilities displayed stability throughout the studied timeframe at 65%.