The bar chart shows the expectation to change of European young people in the next 20 years in 5 different areas. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The bar chart illustrates the changes of a European country in the following two decades predicted by youngsters regarding across 5 different realms namely health, air, water and food quality, and people communication.

Overall, the majority of young people do not have optimistic predictions about future adjustments. Furthermore, the quality of people's interaction is the most anticipated to make improvements, while only a few interviewees hold positive expectations on air pollution.

On the one hand, the fields of communication and nourishment gain the highest anticipation from the young generation. First of all, nearly two-third of the interviewees express positive views on advancements of people communication. Subsequently, the category for food quality takes the second place, as almost half the young population expect it to improve.

On the other hand, the populace’s well-being, air and water standard generally leave a poor impression on youngsters. According to the graph, about 60% of young people believe health and water quality would get worse in the next 20 years, with the former being slightly more appreciated. Finally, air quality is the least anticipated area, with more than three-fourth of the younger generation expect for its degradation.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"The bar chart illustrates the changes of a European country" -> "The bar chart depicts the projected changes in a European country"
Explanation: "Depicts" is a more precise verb than "illustrates" in this context, and "projected" clarifies that the changes are anticipated rather than actual.
"across 5 different realms namely health, air, water and food quality, and people communication" -> "across five distinct domains: health, air, water, food quality, and communication"
Explanation: "Domains" is a more formal term than "realms," and the colon after "domains" is used to introduce the list correctly. Also, "people communication" should be "communication" for grammatical correctness.
"the majority of young people do not have optimistic predictions" -> "the majority of young people do not anticipate optimistic changes"
Explanation: "Anticipate" is more precise in this context, as it specifically refers to expecting future changes, whereas "predictions" can be broader and less specific.
"the quality of people’s interaction" -> "interpersonal communication"
Explanation: "Interpersonal communication" is a more specific and academically appropriate term than "the quality of people’s interaction."
"only a few interviewees hold positive expectations on air pollution" -> "only a few respondents expect improvements in air quality"
Explanation: "Expect improvements in air quality" is more specific and avoids the awkward construction of "hold positive expectations on."
"the fields of communication and nourishment gain the highest anticipation" -> "communication and nutrition are anticipated to undergo the greatest improvements"
Explanation: "Are anticipated to undergo the greatest improvements" is more formal and precise than "gain the highest anticipation."
"nearly two-third" -> "approximately two-thirds"
Explanation: "Approximately" is more formal and precise than "nearly" in academic writing.
"the populace’s well-being, air and water standard" -> "the public’s well-being, air, and water quality"
Explanation: "Public’s well-being" is more formal than "populace’s well-being," and "quality" is the correct term for the quality of air and water.
"generally leave a poor impression on youngsters" -> "are perceived unfavorably by young people"
Explanation: "Are perceived unfavorably by young people" is more formal and avoids the colloquial tone of "leave a poor impression."
"the populace’s well-being, air and water standard" -> "the public’s well-being, air, and water quality"
Explanation: As mentioned earlier, "public’s well-being" is more formal than "populace’s well-being," and "quality" is the correct term for the quality of air and water.
"expect for its degradation" -> "anticipate its deterioration"
Explanation: "Anticipate its deterioration" is more formal and precise than "expect for its degradation," which is awkwardly phrased.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6

Explanation: The essay addresses the requirements of the task by providing an overview of the main features of the bar chart. It presents information appropriately selected, such as the overall trend of negative expectations and the specific percentages for each category. However, the essay could be more concise and focused. For example, the introduction is a bit wordy and could be streamlined. Additionally, the essay could benefit from more specific comparisons between the categories, rather than just stating that some areas are more anticipated than others.

How to improve:

Conciseness: The introduction could be shortened by removing unnecessary phrases like "namely health, air, water and food quality, and people communication."
Specific Comparisons: Instead of saying "the fields of communication and nourishment gain the highest anticipation," provide specific comparisons between the percentages for these categories. For example, "People communication is the most anticipated area for improvement, with nearly two-thirds of respondents expecting positive changes, compared to just over 40% for food quality."
Focus on Key Features: The essay could be more focused on the key features of the chart, such as the overall trend of negative expectations and the significant difference in expectations between people communication and air quality.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay presents a coherent overview of the bar chart, with a clear overall progression from the introduction to the body paragraphs. The information is arranged logically, with separate sections addressing different areas of expectation. However, the use of cohesive devices is somewhat mechanical, and there are instances where referencing could be clearer. For example, phrases like "the populace’s well-being" and "the category for food quality" could be better defined or rephrased for clarity. Additionally, while paragraphing is present, it could be improved to enhance the logical flow of ideas.

How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on enhancing the clarity and variety of cohesive devices used throughout the essay. This could involve using synonyms or more varied phrases to avoid repetition and improve referencing. Additionally, ensuring that each paragraph clearly presents a single central topic and logically connects to the next would strengthen the overall coherence and cohesion of the essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary suitable for the task, with some attempts to use less common vocabulary. However, there are noticeable inaccuracies in word choice and collocation, such as "the changes of a European country" instead of "the changes in European countries," and "the populace’s well-being" which could be more clearly expressed. Additionally, there are some errors in spelling and word formation, such as "two-third" instead of "two-thirds" and "the younger generation expect for its degradation" which should be "the younger generation expects its degradation." These errors do not impede overall communication but do detract from the lexical resource.

How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the essay could benefit from a more varied and sophisticated vocabulary, as well as improved accuracy in word choice and collocation. Practicing the use of less common lexical items correctly and ensuring grammatical accuracy in phrases would enhance the overall lexical resource. Additionally, proofreading for spelling and word formation errors would help to eliminate minor mistakes that could affect the clarity of the message.

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 aligns with the characteristics of Band 6. While there are some attempts at using complex structures, the overall grammatical control is inconsistent. There are noticeable errors in grammar and punctuation, such as "the changes of a European country" (which should be "the changes in a European country") and "the populace’s well-being, air and water standard" (which should be "air and water quality"). These errors occasionally hinder clarity but do not completely obstruct communication.

How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on improving grammatical accuracy and increasing the variety of sentence structures used. This can be done by practicing complex sentences and ensuring correct punctuation. Additionally, proofreading for common grammatical errors and refining sentence clarity will enhance overall coherence and fluency. Engaging with more varied vocabulary and complex grammatical forms will also contribute to a stronger performance in this criterion.

Bài sửa mẫu

The bar chart illustrates the expected changes in a European country over the next two decades as predicted by young people across five different areas: health, air quality, water quality, food quality, and communication.

Overall, the majority of young people do not hold optimistic predictions about future changes. Furthermore, the quality of people’s communication is anticipated to improve the most, while only a small percentage of respondents have positive expectations regarding air pollution.

On the one hand, the areas of communication and food quality receive the highest expectations from the younger generation. First of all, nearly two-thirds of the interviewees express positive views on advancements in communication. Subsequently, food quality ranks second, with almost half of the young population expecting it to improve.

On the other hand, the aspects of health, air quality, and water quality generally leave a negative impression on young people. According to the graph, about 60% of young people believe that health and water quality will deteriorate in the next 20 years, with health being slightly more positively regarded. Finally, air quality is the least anticipated area for improvement, with more than three-quarters of the younger generation expecting its decline.