Task 1: The table below shows percentages of students with different attitudes for facilities in the university in the UK in 2008.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
Task 1: The table below shows percentages of students with different attitudes for facilities in the university in the UK in 2008.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The table demonstrates the porpotions of undergraduate and postgraduate students wording difference level of satisfication to University facilities in the UK in 2008.
Overall, the generality of both undergraduate and postgraduate student were very satisfied with study facility. In addition, social facility were lower and the lowest rate of satisfication is belong to cafeteria.
Looking at the under graduate student, there are 75% were extremely satisfied to the social facility, which is quite similar to the study facility at 85%. While only one half of the students were very satisfied to Cafeteria. Additionally, 20% were quite satisfied and 5% were disatisfied. For the study facility, is 8% and 7% for quite satisfied and disatisfied. Eventually, 35% were quite satisfied and 15% were dissatisfied.
More on to postgraduate, 65% is very satisfied for social facility, which is lower than 90% of study facility. In contrast, is just 40% for cafeteria. for social facility, there were 25% for quite satisfied and 10% for dissatisfied. After that, we have 6% were quite satisfied and 4% dissatisfied for study facility. Ending with cafeteria, It were respectively 25% and 35% for last two levels of satisfication.
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
-
"porpotions" -> "portions"
Explanation: "porpotions" is a typographical error. Correcting it to "portions" ensures the accuracy of the text and maintains professionalism in academic writing. -
"wording difference level of satisfication" -> "level of satisfaction"
Explanation: "wording difference level of satisfication" is awkward and unclear. Simplifying it to "level of satisfaction" clarifies the meaning and aligns with formal academic language. -
"the generality of both undergraduate and postgraduate student were" -> "the majority of both undergraduate and postgraduate students were"
Explanation: "the generality" is an incorrect term. "The majority" is the correct term to describe the larger part of a group. Also, "student" should be pluralized to "students" for grammatical accuracy. -
"social facility were lower and the lowest rate of satisfication is belong to cafeteria" -> "social facilities were lower, with the lowest satisfaction rate being in the cafeteria"
Explanation: "social facility were" should be "social facilities were" for grammatical agreement. The phrase "the lowest rate of satisfication is belong to" is awkward and incorrect. "With the lowest satisfaction rate being in the cafeteria" is clearer and more formal. -
"Looking at the under graduate student," -> "Looking at undergraduate students"
Explanation: "under graduate student" is incorrect. "Undergraduate students" is the correct term to refer to students pursuing an undergraduate degree. -
"there are 75% were extremely satisfied to the social facility" -> "75% of students were extremely satisfied with the social facilities"
Explanation: "there are" is unnecessary and "were" should be "were" for subject-verb agreement. "To the social facility" should be "with the social facilities" for prepositional accuracy. -
"For the study facility, is 8% and 7% for quite satisfied and disatisfied" -> "For the study facilities, 8% were quite satisfied and 7% dissatisfied"
Explanation: "is" is incorrect in this context; "were" is needed for subject-verb agreement. "Disatisfied" is a misspelling; it should be "dissatisfied." -
"More on to postgraduate" -> "Moving to postgraduate"
Explanation: "More on to" is grammatically incorrect. "Moving to" is the correct transition phrase for shifting focus. -
"65% is very satisfied for social facility" -> "65% were very satisfied with the social facilities"
Explanation: "is" should be "were" for subject-verb agreement, and "for social facility" should be "with the social facilities" for prepositional accuracy. -
"is just 40% for cafeteria" -> "is only 40% in the cafeteria"
Explanation: "is just" is informal and vague; "is only" is more precise. "For" is incorrect; "in" is the correct preposition for location. -
"It were respectively 25% and 35% for last two levels of satisfication" -> "It was respectively 25% and 35% for the last two levels of satisfaction"
Explanation: "It were" is incorrect; "It was" is the correct form of the verb. "For last two levels of satisfication" should be "for the last two levels of satisfaction" for clarity and correctness.
Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 5
Band Score: 5
Explanation: The essay generally addresses the task by providing an overview of the data. However, the essay does not present a clear overview of the main trends or differences. The essay also presents key features and bullet points but does not adequately cover them. For example, the essay states that "the generality of both undergraduate and postgraduate student were very satisfied with study facility," but it does not provide any specific data to support this claim. The essay also focuses on details rather than providing a clear overview of the data.
How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clearer overview of the main trends and differences in the data. The essay could also be improved by presenting key features and bullet points more adequately. For example, the essay could state that "the majority of undergraduate students were very satisfied with study facilities, with 85% reporting that they were extremely satisfied." The essay could also be improved by providing more specific data to support its claims. For example, the essay could state that "20% of undergraduate students were quite satisfied with social facilities, while 5% were dissatisfied."
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 satisfaction levels of undergraduate and postgraduate students, the structure is somewhat disjointed. There are instances of inadequate use of cohesive devices, leading to confusion in understanding the relationships between ideas. Additionally, the paragraphing is inconsistent, with some sentences not clearly linked to the main topic of the paragraph.
How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on organizing the essay into clear paragraphs, each with a central topic. Using a wider range of cohesive devices more effectively will help clarify the relationships between ideas. Additionally, ensuring that comparisons are clearly stated and logically sequenced will improve the overall flow of the essay. Proofreading for grammatical errors and clarity will also contribute to a more coherent presentation 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 convey the main features of the data, the vocabulary used is often repetitive and lacks precision. There are noticeable errors in spelling ("porpotions," "satisfication," "disatisfied") and word formation ("is belong to," "more on to"), which may cause some difficulty for the reader. The use of basic vocabulary and phrases does not effectively convey the complexity of the data presented in the table.
How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource score, the writer should aim to use a wider range of vocabulary, including less common lexical items relevant to the context. They should also focus on improving spelling and grammatical accuracy. Additionally, incorporating synonyms and varied expressions to describe satisfaction levels and facilities would help to avoid repetition and convey more precise meanings. Practicing the use of collocations and ensuring correct word forms will further improve clarity and coherence.
Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5
[
Band Score: 5.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of grammatical structures, with several attempts at complex sentences that are often inaccurate. There are frequent grammatical errors, including issues with subject-verb agreement, incorrect word forms, and punctuation errors, which can cause some difficulty for the reader. While the main ideas are communicated, the clarity is compromised by these errors.
How to improve: To improve the score, the writer should focus on enhancing grammatical accuracy by reviewing basic grammar rules, particularly subject-verb agreement and the correct use of tenses. Additionally, practicing the formation of complex sentences with correct punctuation and structure would help in achieving a wider range of grammatical forms. Regular proofreading and seeking feedback on written work can also aid in identifying and correcting errors before submission.
]
Bài sửa mẫu
The table demonstrates the proportions of undergraduate and postgraduate students expressing different levels of satisfaction with university facilities in the UK in 2008.
Overall, the majority of both undergraduate and postgraduate students were very satisfied with the study facilities. In addition, satisfaction with social facilities was lower, and the lowest rate of satisfaction belonged to the cafeteria.
Looking at the undergraduate students, 75% were extremely satisfied with the social facilities, which is quite similar to the study facilities at 85%. However, only half of the students were very satisfied with the cafeteria. Additionally, 20% were quite satisfied, and 5% were dissatisfied. For the study facilities, 8% were quite satisfied, and 7% were dissatisfied. Ultimately, 35% were quite satisfied, and 15% were dissatisfied.
Regarding postgraduate students, 65% were very satisfied with the social facilities, which is lower than the 90% satisfaction rate for study facilities. In contrast, only 40% were satisfied with the cafeteria. For social facilities, there were 25% who were quite satisfied and 10% who were dissatisfied. Furthermore, 6% were quite satisfied, and 4% were dissatisfied with the study facilities. Lastly, for the cafeteria, the proportions were 25% and 35% for the last two levels of satisfaction.
Phản hồi