The chart and graph below give information about three categories of workers in Australia and the unemployment levels within those groups. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The chart and graph below give information about three categories of workers in Australia and the unemployment levels within those groups.

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

The given chart illustrates different kinds of employees in Australia, and the provided graph shows the umployment levels of those categories.

Overall, the workers borned in Australia made up the highest figure for workforce in 2003 in this nation. Moreover, the percentages of the unemployeed of Australia, ESC, and NESC saw upward trends from 1993 to 2003, while the most dominant drop was said for NESC.

Regarding the pie chart, those originating from Australia contributed 76%, which was the greatest number when compared to other sections. In contrast, ESC and NESC accounted for 24% altogether. The former was a mere 10%, while the latter was 4% higher.

In terms of the line graph, NESC started at around 8%, which nearly twice as much as Australia and ESC in 1993, but it plummeted to about 3% in 2003. In addition, both Australia and ESC commenced at about 4%. However, they both experienced a steadily decrease to 2003, with approximately 2.5% and 1% respectively.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

1. "borned" -> "born"
   Explanation: "Borned" is not a standard verb form in English. The correct past participle of "to be born" is "born."
2. "umployment" -> "unemployment"
   Explanation: "Umployment" is a misspelling of "unemployment," which refers to the state of being without a job.
3. "the most dominant drop was said for NESC" -> "the most significant decrease was observed in NESC"
   Explanation: "Dominant drop" is not idiomatic in this context. "Significant decrease" is a more appropriate and precise term to describe a noticeable decline.
4. "contributed 76%" -> "accounted for 76%"
   Explanation: "Contributed" is fine, but "accounted for" is a more formal and precise term commonly used in data analysis contexts.
5. "when compared to other sections" -> "compared to the rest"
   Explanation: "Other sections" is slightly vague. "Compared to the rest" is a concise way to refer to the remaining categories.
6. "ESC and NESC accounted for 24% altogether" -> "ESC and NESC combined accounted for 24%"
   Explanation: Adding "combined" clarifies that the 24% refers to the total contribution of ESC and NESC together.
7. "In contrast, ESC and NESC accounted for 24% altogether" -> "In contrast, ESC and NESC collectively accounted for 24%"
   Explanation: "Altogether" can be replaced with "collectively" for a more formal tone.
8. "was a mere 10%" -> "was only 10%"
   Explanation: "Mere" is slightly informal in this context. "Only" maintains the same meaning while being more appropriate in formal writing.
9. "NESC started at around 8%, which nearly twice as much as Australia and ESC in 1993" -> "NESC started at around 8%, nearly twice as high as Australia and ESC in 1993"
   Explanation: "Twice as much" can be replaced with "twice as high" for better clarity and precision in comparing percentages.
10. "steadily decrease" -> "steady decrease"
    Explanation: "Steadily" is an adverb and doesn’t fit with "decrease." Using "steady decrease" provides the correct adjective form to describe the trend.
11. "both experienced a steadily decrease" -> "both experienced a steady decrease"
    Explanation: Same as above, "steadily" should be corrected to "steady" to match with "decrease."

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

[
Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay adequately addresses the task by summarizing the main features and making comparisons where relevant. It covers the requirements of the task by providing an overview of the data presented in the chart and graph. Key features such as workforce composition and trends in unemployment levels are highlighted and compared between different categories of workers.
How to improve: To improve, the essay could provide a more detailed analysis of the data, ensuring that all information is relevant and accurate. Additionally, the essay could offer more specific comparisons and explanations to further develop the response.
]

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay arranges information and ideas coherently with a clear overall progression. The introduction effectively summarizes the main features of the chart and graph. Paragraphing is utilized, but not always logically. There is a clear attempt to organize information, yet some paragraphs lack clear topic sentences or transitions. Cohesive devices are used effectively to some extent, but there are instances of faulty cohesion, such as unclear pronoun references ("the most dominant drop was said for NESC") and mechanical usage of cohesive devices. Additionally, the essay lacks precise referencing and substitution, resulting in some repetitiveness.

How to improve: Ensure that each paragraph has a clear topic sentence and logical organization of ideas. Work on using cohesive devices more accurately and sparingly, focusing on maintaining coherence within and between sentences. Use referencing and substitution more effectively to avoid repetition and enhance clarity.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, with some attempts to use less common vocabulary. The writer employs various terms related to employment and unemployment, such as "workforce," "unemployed," "originating," and "contribute." Additionally, there are some less common lexical items like "plummeted" and "commenced," although there are occasional inaccuracies and awkward word choices ("borned" instead of "born," "umployment" instead of "unemployment"). The essay makes some errors in spelling and word formation, but they do not significantly impede communication.

How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource, the writer should aim for greater accuracy in word choice and spelling. Proofreading for errors in spelling and word formation is essential. Additionally, expanding vocabulary by incorporating more diverse and precise terms related to the topic of employment and unemployment would improve the overall lexical richness of the essay.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6

Explanation:
The essay attempts to use a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, indicative of a Band 6 performance. The writer shows some ability to handle complex constructions, though errors with verb forms (“borned” should be “born”), subject-verb agreement (“percentages … saw”), and prepositional use (“commenced at about 4%” could be refined for clarity) are evident. These errors do not significantly hinder comprehension but do impede the flow and occasionally clarity of information. The variety in grammatical constructions is appreciated, yet the precision and control over these forms are not consistent throughout the essay.

How to improve:
To elevate the grammatical range and accuracy towards a higher band, the writer should focus on:

1. Reviewing and refining verb tenses and forms: Ensure correct use of past and present forms to maintain consistency and accuracy. For instance, correcting “borned” to “born” and checking that verb tenses consistently match the time frame discussed.
2. Increasing the range of complex structures used: While some complex sentences are used, there is scope to incorporate additional structures such as conditional sentences, passive voice where appropriate, and varied subordinate clauses to enhance the complexity and flexibility of the writing.
3. Proofreading for punctuation and minor errors: Frequent review and correction of punctuation, especially comma usage in complex sentences, can significantly clarify meaning and improve the professionalism of the writing.
4. Practicing precision in language: This can be achieved by reducing redundancy (e.g., “the provided graph shows the unemployment levels of those categories” could be simplified to “the graph shows their unemployment levels”) and ensuring the accuracy of prepositions and articles.

Bài sửa mẫu

The provided data illustrates the composition of the workforce in Australia across three distinct categories, alongside their corresponding unemployment rates over a decade.

Overall, Australian-born workers represented the largest segment of the workforce in 2003. Unemployment rates for Australians, ESC, and NESC exhibited upward trends from 1993 to 2003, with the most significant decline observed in the NESC category.

The pie chart highlights that Australian-born workers accounted for the majority at 76%, with ESC and NESC combined making up the remaining 24%. ESC constituted a mere 10%, while NESC was slightly higher at 14%.

Examining the line graph, NESC began at around 8% in 1993, almost twice that of Australian-born and ESC workers. However, by 2003, it had dropped significantly to about 3%. Conversely, both Australian-born and ESC workers started at approximately 4%, with a steady decline to about 2.5% and 1% respectively by 2003.