The bar chart below shows the percentage of government spending on roads and transport in four countries in the years 1990, 1995, 2000 and 2005.
The bar chart below shows the percentage of government spending on roads and transport in four countries in the years 1990, 1995, 2000 and 2005.
The graph illustrates how much governments in four nations invested in transport and roads from 1990 to 2005.
Overall, there was an increase in the proportion of government spending on roads and transport in the USA, while the reverse is true for other countries. In addition, Portugal had the highest figure throughout the period.
The proportion of money allocated on roads and transport in the USA started at about around 12% in 1990 which it experienced a slight decrease to 10% in the next 5 years, before ending the period at exactly 15% in 2005. Opposite change can be seen in the figure for the UK, which declined moderately from 10% to roughly 6% on the given period, despite a minor rise in 2000.
Around 22% of government expending on roads and transport falled gradually to less than 20% in the last year, despite a lessen fluctuate in the range from 20% to 23% between 1995 and 2000. Meanwhile, the figure for Portugal was the highest figure in four countries, began at around 27% in the first year which it experienced a rapidly drop to exactly 20% at the end of the period.
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
-
"illustrates how much" -> "illustrates the extent to which"
Explanation: "The extent to which" is more precise and formal than "how much," enhancing the academic tone. -
"the reverse is true for other countries" -> "the opposite trend was observed in the other countries"
Explanation: "Opposite trend was observed" is more formal and specific than "the reverse is true," improving clarity and academic style. -
"allocated on roads and transport" -> "allocated to roads and transport"
Explanation: "Allocated to" is the correct prepositional phrase, enhancing grammatical accuracy. -
"about around" -> "approximately"
Explanation: "Approximately" is more concise and formal than the redundant "about around," improving clarity. -
"which it experienced a slight decrease" -> "during which it experienced a slight decrease"
Explanation: Adding "during" clarifies the temporal relationship, enhancing grammatical correctness. -
"the opposite change can be seen" -> "a contrasting change can be observed"
Explanation: "Contrasting change" is more precise and formal than "opposite change," improving the academic tone. -
"falled gradually" -> "fell gradually"
Explanation: "Falled" is a misspelling; "fell" is the correct past tense of "fall," ensuring grammatical accuracy. -
"despite a lessen fluctuate" -> "despite a minor fluctuation"
Explanation: "Minor fluctuation" is more precise and grammatically correct than "lessen fluctuate," enhancing clarity. -
"the figure for Portugal was the highest figure in four countries" -> "the figure for Portugal was the highest among the four countries"
Explanation: "Among the four countries" is more precise and avoids redundancy, improving clarity and conciseness. -
"which it experienced a rapidly drop" -> "during which it experienced a rapid decline"
Explanation: "During" clarifies the temporal relationship, and "rapid decline" is more formal and precise than "rapidly drop," enhancing academic tone.
Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 5
Band Score: 5
Explanation: The essay generally addresses the task, but the format is inappropriate in places. The essay does not present a clear overview of the main trends, and the data is not always presented accurately. For example, the essay states that the proportion of government spending on roads and transport in the USA "started at about around 12% in 1990 which it experienced a slight decrease to 10% in the next 5 years, before ending the period at exactly 15% in 2005." However, the graph shows that the proportion of government spending on roads and transport in the USA was actually around 10% in 1990, and it increased to around 15% in 2005.
How to improve: The essay could be improved by presenting a clearer overview of the main trends in the data. The essay could also be improved by presenting the data more accurately. For example, the essay could state that the proportion of government spending on roads and transport in the USA increased from around 10% in 1990 to around 15% in 2005. The essay could also be improved by using more precise language. For example, instead of saying "around 22% of government expending on roads and transport falled gradually to less than 20% in the last year," the essay could say "the proportion of government spending on roads and transport in Italy decreased from around 22% in 1990 to around 18% in 2005."
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 describe trends in government spending, the connections between ideas are sometimes unclear, leading to confusion. The use of cohesive devices is inadequate and occasionally inaccurate, which detracts from the clarity of the information presented. Additionally, paragraphing is present but not always logical, as the transitions between different countries’ data could be smoother.
How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on improving the logical flow of ideas. This can be achieved by using clearer transitions between sentences and paragraphs. Additionally, varying the use of cohesive devices and ensuring they accurately reflect the relationships between ideas will help. Finally, organizing the essay into well-defined paragraphs that each focus on a specific aspect of the data will aid in clarity and progression.
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 information from the bar chart, the use of vocabulary is basic and repetitive, particularly in phrases like "government spending on roads and transport" and "the figure for Portugal." There are noticeable errors in word choice, such as "falled" instead of "fell," and "expending" instead of "expenditure." These errors may cause some difficulty for the reader, impacting overall clarity.
How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on expanding their vocabulary range by incorporating more varied and precise lexical items. They should also pay attention to word formation and spelling to minimize errors. Using synonyms and more complex sentence structures can enhance the sophistication of the essay. Additionally, practicing collocations and idiomatic expressions relevant to the topic can improve the overall quality of the lexical resource.
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 with some attempts at complex sentences. While there are some accurate structures, frequent grammatical errors, such as "falled" instead of "fell," "lessen fluctuate" instead of "less fluctuation," and awkward phrasing like "which it experienced," hinder clarity and comprehension. These errors can cause difficulty for the reader, impacting the overall effectiveness of the communication.
How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on expanding their range of grammatical structures by incorporating more complex sentences and ensuring accuracy in verb forms and other grammatical elements. Additionally, proofreading for common errors and awkward phrases can enhance clarity and coherence in the writing. Engaging with varied sentence structures and practicing grammar exercises would also be beneficial.
Bài sửa mẫu
The graph illustrates how much governments in four nations invested in transport and roads from 1990 to 2005. Overall, there was an increase in the proportion of government spending on roads and transport in the USA, while the opposite trend was observed in the other countries. Additionally, Portugal had the highest figure throughout the period.
The proportion of money allocated to roads and transport in the USA started at approximately 12% in 1990, which experienced a slight decrease to 10% over the next five years, before ending the period at exactly 15% in 2005. A contrasting trend can be seen in the figure for the UK, which declined moderately from 10% to roughly 6% during the given period, despite a minor rise in 2000.
Around 22% of government expenditure on roads and transport fell gradually to less than 20% in the last year, despite a slight fluctuation in the range from 20% to 23% between 1995 and 2000. Meanwhile, the figure for Portugal was the highest among the four countries, beginning at around 27% in the first year, which then experienced a rapid drop to exactly 20% by the end of the period.
Phản hồi