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

The line graph shows the percentage of tourists of England who visited four differents attractions in Brighton.

Overall, the Pavilion seems to be the place with the most tourist visiting, so the occupancy percentage is the highest. Meanwhile, art gallery have the lowest visitors among the above attractions.

In the 1985-2000 period, the attractions rate of Pavilion and Pier fluctuated, the rate of Pavilion visitors increased year by year and reached a peak almost 50% in 1995 but then the number of tourists plummeted and gradually decreased under 30% year by year. Since 2000, the tourist of Pavilion has become stabilised. Meanwhile, Pier tourist rate is always levelled off but in 2000 the proportion of tourists visiting the Pier gradually increased over 20% until 2010.

Over the same period, the proportion of tourists visiting art gallery and festival also fluctuated strongly. In 1980-1985, the rate of visitor soared and reached a peak almost 40% in 1985 but after only a period of time the number of visitors decreased dramatically under 10%. In 1990, the rate of visistors became stabilised and by 2000 the tourist rate had once again slumped below 10%. Meanwhile, Festival tourists rate is always remained constant. The festival's highest visitors rate was in 1985 at 30% and dropped sharply year by year and become stabilised in 1985. Since 1985, the number of visitors fell gradually until 1995 it climbed slowly and in 2000 festival became levelled off.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"The line graph shows" -> "The line graph depicts"
Explanation: "Depicts" is a more precise and formal term than "shows," enhancing the academic tone of the introduction.
"of England who visited" -> "in England who visited"
Explanation: The correct preposition to use here is "in" instead of "of," as "of" incorrectly implies possession or relationship, which is not the intended meaning in this context.
"four differents attractions" -> "four different attractions"
Explanation: "Differents" is a spelling error; the correct spelling is "different," which is also more appropriate for formal writing.
"the Pavilion seems to be the place with the most tourist visiting" -> "the Pavilion appears to be the most visited attraction"
Explanation: "Appears to be the most visited attraction" is more concise and formally appropriate than the original phrase, which is awkwardly constructed.
"the occupancy percentage is the highest" -> "the highest occupancy rate"
Explanation: "The highest occupancy rate" is a more direct and formal way to express the comparison, avoiding the awkward phrasing of "the occupancy percentage is the highest."
"art gallery have the lowest visitors" -> "the art gallery has the lowest visitor numbers"
Explanation: "Has the lowest visitor numbers" is grammatically correct and more precise than "have the lowest visitors," which is grammatically incorrect and vague.
"the attractions rate of Pavilion and Pier fluctuated" -> "the visitor rates for the Pavilion and Pier fluctuated"
Explanation: "Visitor rates" is a more specific and accurate term than "attractions rate," which is unclear and imprecise in this context.
"the number of tourists plummeted" -> "the number of tourists significantly decreased"
Explanation: "Significantly decreased" is a more formal and academically appropriate term than "plummeted," which can be seen as overly dramatic for an academic context.
"tourist of Pavilion" -> "visitors to the Pavilion"
Explanation: "Visitors to the Pavilion" is grammatically correct and clearer than "tourist of Pavilion," which is awkward and incorrect.
"Pier tourist rate is always levelled off" -> "the Pier’s tourist rate remained steady"
Explanation: "Remained steady" is a more formal and precise way to describe consistency in data trends than "is always levelled off," which is colloquial and less clear.
"the proportion of tourists visiting art gallery and festival also fluctuated strongly" -> "the visitor proportions for the art gallery and festival also varied significantly"
Explanation: "Visitor proportions" is a more precise term than "proportion of tourists," and "varied significantly" is more formal and appropriate than "fluctuated strongly," which is somewhat informal.
"the rate of visitor soared" -> "the visitor rate soared"
Explanation: "The visitor rate soared" is grammatically correct and more direct, avoiding the awkward construction of "the rate of visitor."
"visistors" -> "visitors"
Explanation: Corrects a spelling error, ensuring accuracy in the text.
"become stabilised" -> "became stabilized"
Explanation: "Became stabilized" is the correct past tense form of the verb, aligning with the context of past events described in the graph.
"levelled off" -> "remained constant"
Explanation: "Remained constant" is a clearer and more formal way to describe stability in data trends than "levelled off," which can be seen as slightly informal.

These changes enhance the formality, clarity, and precision of the text, aligning it more closely with academic writing standards.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5

Explanation: The essay provides a general overview of the main features of the line graph, but it does not present a clear overview of the main trends. The essay also focuses on details rather than key features. For example, the essay states that the "Pavilion seems to be the place with the most tourist visiting," but it does not provide any specific data to support this claim. The essay also provides a detailed description of the fluctuations in the number of tourists visiting each attraction, but it does not make any comparisons between the attractions.

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 making more comparisons between the attractions. For example, the essay could compare the peak number of tourists visiting each attraction or the rate of change in the number of tourists visiting each attraction. The essay could also be improved by providing more specific data to support its claims. For example, the essay could state that the Pavilion had the highest number of tourists in 1995, with almost 50% of tourists visiting the attraction.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5

Explanation: The essay presents information with some organization, but there is a lack of overall progression. The use of cohesive devices is inadequate and sometimes inaccurate. For example, phrases like "meanwhile," "over the same period," and "since" are used, but not always effectively, leading to some confusion. There is also some repetition and lack of clear referencing, which affects the flow of the essay. Paragraphing is present but could be improved for better logical flow and clarity.

How to improve:

Improve Cohesion: Use a wider range of cohesive devices accurately to link ideas and sentences more effectively. Ensure that each cohesive device clearly indicates the relationship between ideas.
Enhance Paragraphing: Organize the essay into clear paragraphs, each focusing on a single central idea. This will help in presenting a more logical progression of information.
Clear Referencing: Use referencing and substitution more effectively to avoid repetition and to make the essay more concise and coherent.
Logical Flow: Ensure that the information flows logically from one point to the next, making it easier for the reader to follow the progression of ideas.

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 describe trends and comparisons among the attractions, the vocabulary used is basic and repetitive. There are noticeable errors in word choice (e.g., "the occupancy percentage is the highest" could be better phrased) and spelling (e.g., "differents," "visitors," "stabilised"). These errors may cause some difficulty for the reader and detract from the overall clarity of the information presented.

How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource, the writer should aim to incorporate a wider range of vocabulary, particularly less common lexical items that convey precise meanings. Additionally, focusing on correct spelling and word formation is essential. Using synonyms to avoid repetition and employing more sophisticated phrases to describe trends and comparisons would also improve the essay’s overall quality. Engaging with vocabulary exercises and reading more varied texts can help develop a richer vocabulary.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of grammatical structures, primarily using simple sentences with some attempts at complex sentences. However, there are frequent grammatical errors, particularly in subject-verb agreement and article usage (e.g., "the occupancy percentage is the highest" should be "the occupancy percentage was the highest"). These errors can cause some difficulty for the reader in understanding the intended meaning. Additionally, punctuation is often faulty, which further affects clarity. Overall, while the essay conveys some information, the grammatical inaccuracies detract from effective communication.
How to improve: To improve the band score, the writer should focus on expanding their range of grammatical structures by incorporating more complex sentences and ensuring that they are accurate. Paying attention to subject-verb agreement, article usage, and punctuation will enhance clarity. Additionally, proofreading the essay for minor errors before submission can help reduce the frequency of mistakes and improve overall accuracy.

Bài sửa mẫu

The line graph shows the percentage of tourists from England who visited four different attractions in Brighton.

Overall, the Pavilion appears to be the most popular destination, as it has the highest occupancy percentage. In contrast, the art gallery has the lowest number of visitors among the attractions.

During the period from 1985 to 2000, the visitor rates for the Pavilion and the Pier fluctuated. The number of Pavilion visitors increased year by year, reaching a peak of almost 50% in 1995, but then the number of tourists plummeted and gradually decreased to below 30% year by year. Since 2000, the number of tourists at the Pavilion has stabilized. Meanwhile, the tourist rate for the Pier remained relatively constant, but in 2000, the proportion of tourists visiting the Pier gradually increased to over 20% until 2010.

Over the same period, the proportion of tourists visiting the art gallery and the festival also fluctuated significantly. From 1980 to 1985, the visitor rate soared, reaching a peak of almost 40% in 1985, but after a short period, the number of visitors decreased dramatically to below 10%. In 1990, the rate of visitors stabilized, and by 2000, the tourist rate had once again slumped below 10%. Meanwhile, the festival’s tourist rate remained constant. The festival’s highest visitor rate was in 1985 at 30%, which dropped sharply year by year and became stabilized in 1985. Since then, the number of visitors fell gradually until 1995, when it climbed slowly, and by 2000, the festival visitor rate leveled off.