Task 1: The graphs below show a typical American and a Japanese office.
The given graphs illustrate a comparison of a typical Japanese work office and an American counterpart.
From an overall perspective, it is evident that there are significant differences between two types of architectures. An American office is devided into a myriad of small areas according to each departments of the company and workers use a large number of personal desks. In contrast, that of Japan is seperated into only two big sections and employees mostly work together on a huge table.
In terms of a typical Japanese office, if one see through the window in the middle-top of the room, the first things that catchs their visions would be the desk of the department manager. Further to the other end of the room, there are two big tables, which are consisted of four small desks each, are placed parallelly with section managers on one end and other staffs on the remaining spaces
Regarding a decent American office, one most obvious difference is that there are two windows compared to only one in the Japanese counterpart. The office is divided into seven distinct areas, each one is used for a different department or purpose. In the middle of the room, there are two lines of four personal tables for workers compared to two big tables in Japanese office.
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
"devided" -> "divided"
Explanation: "Divided" is the correct spelling of the word, maintaining proper grammar and spelling enhances the credibility of the writing.
"according to each departments" -> "corresponding to each department"
Explanation: "Corresponding to each department" is a more accurate phrase, using "departments" in the plural form is incorrect here.
"catchs their visions" -> "captures their attention"
Explanation: "Captures their attention" is a more idiomatic and sophisticated way to express the idea of drawing someone’s focus.
"consisted of four small desks each" -> "comprising four small desks each"
Explanation: "Comprising four small desks each" is a more formal and accurate way to describe the composition of the tables.
"parallelly" -> "in parallel"
Explanation: "In parallel" is the correct adverbial phrase to describe the arrangement of the tables in relation to each other.
"Regarding a decent American office" -> "Concerning an average American office"
Explanation: "Concerning an average American office" is a more appropriate and formal phrase to introduce the subsequent description.
"one most obvious difference" -> "the most notable difference"
Explanation: "The most notable difference" is a stronger and more precise phrase to highlight a significant contrast.
"two lines of four personal tables for workers" -> "two rows of four individual workstations"
Explanation: "Two rows of four individual workstations" provides a clearer description of the setup, avoiding repetition and using a more precise term for work areas.
"compared to only one in the Japanese counterpart" -> "contrasted with only one in the Japanese equivalent"
Explanation: "Contrasted with only one in the Japanese equivalent" offers a more sophisticated way to convey the comparison between the two settings.
"big tables in Japanese office" -> "large tables in the Japanese office"
Explanation: "Large tables in the Japanese office" provides a more accurate and descriptive term for the tables, avoiding the repetitive use of "big."
Improving vocabulary and correcting grammar and word choice errors enhances the clarity and sophistication of the essay, making the descriptions more precise and formal.
Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 5
Band Score: 5.0
The essay attempts to address the task by comparing a typical Japanese office with an American one. It provides some key differences in layout and structures between the two. The overview touches upon the distinct features, such as the desk setups and the division of space.
How to improve:
To enhance the Task Achievement score:
- Structure and Clarity: Ensure a clearer organization and coherence in presenting the comparisons. Use paragraphs to separate and elaborate on different aspects, making it easier to follow.
- Accuracy and Detail: Aim for more accurate descriptions and specific details about each office’s layout, rather than vague statements. This will strengthen the analysis and meet the criteria for covering key features.
- Overview and Analysis: Offer a more comprehensive overview of the data presented in the graphs. Elaborate on more than just the physical setup, discussing possible implications or reasons behind the differences observed.
Adding specific data from the graphs and focusing on the significant trends will significantly bolster the essay’s Task Achievement score.
Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6
Band Score: 6.0
The essay demonstrates a reasonable level of coherence and cohesion, falling into Band 6 territory. The overall organization is clear, with a logical progression of ideas. There is an attempt to compare and contrast the American and Japanese offices, providing a structured overview of their differences.
The essay effectively uses cohesive devices, such as transition words like "in contrast" and "regarding." However, there are instances where cohesion within sentences is faulty, and some sentences lack smooth transitions. For example, the phrase "Further to the other end of the room" could be more smoothly connected to the preceding sentence for improved flow.
Paragraphing is generally logical, but there are areas where the essay could benefit from more seamless transitions between paragraphs. The organization of information within paragraphs is reasonable, presenting a clear central topic in each section.
The referencing and substitution within the essay are acceptable, contributing to coherence. However, there is room for improvement in the clarity and appropriateness of some references. For instance, the phrase "that of Japan" could be more specifically linked to the Japanese office for enhanced clarity.
How to improve:
- Sentence-level cohesion: Pay attention to the flow within sentences, ensuring a smoother connection of ideas. This can be achieved by using a variety of cohesive devices and conjunctions.
- Transitions between paragraphs: Work on creating more seamless transitions between paragraphs to enhance the overall coherence of the essay.
- Clarity in referencing: Ensure that references and substitutions are clear and directly connect to the intended subjects, avoiding ambiguity.
Overall, while the essay displays a satisfactory level of coherence and cohesion, refining these aspects will contribute to a more polished and Band 7-worthy response.
Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6
Band Score: 6.0
The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, incorporating some descriptive terms to convey the differences between American and Japanese offices. There is an attempt to use less common vocabulary, such as "counterpart," and the writer introduces some details about the layout of both offices. However, there are instances of inaccuracy and awkward word choices, such as "devided" instead of "divided," "catchs" instead of "catches," and "seperated" instead of "separated." Additionally, there are minor errors in word formation and spelling, such as "vision" instead of "visions" and "consisted" instead of "consisting."
How to improve:
To enhance the Lexical Resource and move towards a higher band score, the writer should focus on improving accuracy in word choice, spelling, and word formation. Careful proofreading and revision can help eliminate these minor errors. Additionally, incorporating a wider range of vocabulary, especially more precise and varied terms related to office environments, would contribute to a more sophisticated use of language. The essay could benefit from a smoother flow and better coherence by paying attention to sentence structure and clarity in expression.
Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5
Band Score: 5.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of sentence structures, with occasional attempts at complexity. There are noticeable grammatical errors and inaccuracies throughout the essay, such as "devided" instead of "divided," "catchs" instead of "catch," and "seperated" instead of "separated." Punctuation is also faulty, as seen in the inconsistent use of commas and missing periods in some sentences. The attempt at complex sentences is evident, but accuracy tends to suffer, affecting overall communication.
How to improve: To enhance the grammatical range and accuracy, the writer should focus on using a wider variety of sentence structures. Attention to basic grammar rules, such as subject-verb agreement and correct verb forms, is crucial. Additionally, careful proofreading for punctuation errors will contribute to a smoother and more accurate expression of ideas. Practice incorporating more complex structures with precision to elevate the overall quality of the essay.
Bài sửa mẫu
The provided graphs offer a comparative analysis of a typical American office and its Japanese counterpart.
Overall, it is evident that there are significant architectural distinctions between the two office types. The American office is characterized by a multitude of small areas allocated to different departments, with employees utilizing numerous personal desks. In contrast, the Japanese office is divided into two expansive sections, where employees predominantly collaborate at a communal large table.
Examining the typical Japanese office, gazing through the window positioned in the middle-top of the room, one’s attention is drawn to the desk of the department manager. Extending towards the opposite end of the room, two substantial tables, each comprising four smaller desks, are arranged parallelly. Section managers occupy one end, while other staff members occupy the remaining spaces.
In contrast, a standard American office exhibits a prominent distinction with two windows, as opposed to the single window in its Japanese counterpart. The office space is compartmentalized into seven distinct areas, each dedicated to a specific department or purpose. Positioned centrally in the room are two rows of four individual desks for workers, differing from the Japanese setup, which features two large communal tables.