The chart below shows the percentage of spending on roads and transport in four countries from 1990 to 2005.

The given bar chart illustrates the proportion of roads and transport investment in four countries from 1990 to 2005.
Overall, all of the surveyed countries experienced a decline in the spending on roadway systems and vehicles while USA remained stable. Furthermore, the data for Portugal was consistently the highest in all years observed.
As can be seen from the graph, Portugal started at its peak at 27% then decreased sharply to 20% in 1995 before continuing went down gradually to 17% and 15% in 2000 and 2005 respectively. The same downward trend was true for the case of UK which fell from 10% in 1990 to 5% in 2005 with unremarkable rise to approximately 14% in 1995.
Regarding the remaining categories, Italy spent less and less expenditure on transportation throughout the years, from 20% in 1990 to 16% and around 14% in 1995 and 2005 correspondingly. Meanwhile, USA witnessed a gradual fluctuation in the data, hovered around 15% throughout the surveyed years.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"The given bar chart" -> "The provided bar chart"
Explanation: "Provided" is more formal and precise than "given," which is somewhat informal and vague in this context.
"four countries" -> "four nations"
Explanation: "Nations" is more formal and academically appropriate than "countries" in this context, aligning better with the style of academic writing.
"experienced a decline" -> "saw a decline"
Explanation: "Saw a decline" is more concise and direct, which is preferred in formal academic writing for clarity and brevity.
"the spending on roadway systems and vehicles" -> "expenditure on roadway infrastructure and vehicles"
Explanation: "Expenditure" is more precise and formal than "spending," and "infrastructure" is a more specific term than "systems," enhancing the academic tone.
"continued went down" -> "continued to decline"
Explanation: "Continued to decline" is grammatically correct and more formal than "continued went down," which is awkward and informal.
"unremarkable rise" -> "minimal increase"
Explanation: "Minimal increase" is more precise and formal than "unremarkable rise," which is somewhat vague and informal.
"less and less expenditure" -> "decreasing expenditure"
Explanation: "Decreasing expenditure" is more formal and concise than "less and less expenditure," which is repetitive and informal.
"hovered around" -> "remained relatively stable"
Explanation: "Remained relatively stable" is a more formal and precise way to describe the stability of the data, avoiding the colloquial tone of "hovered around."

These changes aim to refine the vocabulary to better suit an academic style, enhancing precision and formality while maintaining clarity and readability.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6

Explanation: The essay provides an overview of the main trends in the data, but it does not fully extend the key features. For example, the essay states that Portugal experienced a sharp decrease in spending from 1990 to 1995, but it does not provide any specific figures to support this claim. The essay also does not provide a clear comparison of the spending trends across the four countries.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing more specific details about the key features of the data. For example, the essay could state that Portugal’s spending on roads and transport decreased from 27% in 1990 to 20% in 1995, a decrease of 7%. The essay could also provide a more detailed comparison of the spending trends across the four countries. For example, the essay could state that Portugal’s spending on roads and transport was consistently higher than the other three countries, and that the UK experienced the largest decrease in spending over the period.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay arranges information and ideas coherently, presenting a clear overall progression. The introduction effectively summarizes the main trends observed in the chart, and the subsequent paragraphs provide specific details about each country’s spending. However, the use of cohesive devices is somewhat mechanical, with instances of awkward phrasing (e.g., "the same downward trend was true for the case of UK"). Additionally, while the essay uses paragraphing, it could be more logically structured to enhance clarity and flow.

How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on improving the variety and appropriateness of cohesive devices to create smoother transitions between ideas. Additionally, ensuring that each paragraph has a clear central topic and logically flows into the next would enhance coherence. Clarifying references and avoiding repetitive phrases would also contribute to a more polished essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary relevant to the task, such as "proportion," "investment," and "downward trend." However, it attempts to use less common vocabulary with some inaccuracies, such as "hovered around" which could be more precisely articulated. There are also instances of awkward phrasing, like "the same downward trend was true for the case of UK," which detracts from clarity. While errors in spelling and word formation are present, they do not significantly impede communication.

How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the essay could benefit from a more varied and sophisticated vocabulary. Incorporating more precise terms and phrases, as well as ensuring correct collocations, would enhance clarity. Additionally, reducing grammatical errors and awkward constructions would improve the overall fluency and flexibility of the language used.

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 is characteristic of a Band 6. While there are some grammatical errors and awkward phrasing (e.g., "before continuing went down gradually"), these do not significantly impede communication. The overall structure is clear, and the main points are conveyed effectively. However, the presence of errors in grammar and punctuation, such as "the data for Portugal was consistently the highest" (should be "were consistently the highest") and "hovered around 15% throughout the surveyed years" (should be "hovering"), indicates that the control over grammar could be improved.

How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on enhancing grammatical accuracy and reducing errors. This can be accomplished by proofreading the essay for common grammatical mistakes, practicing the use of more complex sentence structures accurately, and ensuring that all sentences are clear and free from ambiguity. Additionally, incorporating a wider range of vocabulary and varying sentence structures could also contribute to a better score in this criterion.

Bài sửa mẫu

The given bar chart illustrates the proportion of spending on roads and transport in four countries from 1990 to 2005. Overall, all of the surveyed countries experienced a decline in expenditure on roadway systems and vehicles, while the USA remained stable. Furthermore, the data for Portugal consistently represented the highest percentage in all years observed.

As can be seen from the graph, Portugal started at its peak of 27% and then decreased sharply to 20% in 1995 before continuing to decline gradually to 17% and 15% in 2000 and 2005, respectively. The same downward trend was evident in the case of the UK, which fell from 10% in 1990 to 5% in 2005, with a notable rise to approximately 14% in 1995.

Regarding the remaining countries, Italy exhibited a decreasing trend in expenditure on transportation throughout the years, from 20% in 1990 to 16% and around 14% in 1995 and 2005, respectively. Meanwhile, the USA witnessed gradual fluctuations in the data, hovering around 15% throughout the surveyed years.