The chart below shows the waste disposal in one European country from 2005 to 2008.

The bar chart depicts the number of waste disposal in one European nation from 2005 to 2008.
From an overall perspective, except for the amount of Burning grew in 4 years which surpassed
Landfill to become the highest waste disposal in last year. The other sectors experienced at a
drop.
As can be inferred from the bar chart, the number of Landfill declined rapidly from 1800 to 600
milion tonnes in 4 years. Besides, the figue for Dumping at sea remained stable at 600 milion
tonnes from 2005 to 2007 before dropping 20 milion tonnes in last years.
Moreover, the number of Burning gradually increased from 460 to 900 throughout the process
which surpassed the figue for Landing in last year.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"the number of waste disposal" -> "the volume of waste disposal"
Explanation: "Volume" is a more precise term in this context, as it refers to the quantity of waste being disposed of, enhancing clarity.
"except for the amount of Burning grew in 4 years which surpassed Landfill" -> "with the exception of the volume of incineration, which increased over the four years and surpassed landfill"
Explanation: "Incineration" is a more formal term than "Burning," and "increased over the four years" is clearer and more precise than "grew in 4 years." This revision improves the academic tone and clarity.
"the highest waste disposal in last year" -> "the highest waste disposal method in the final year"
Explanation: Adding "method" clarifies that it refers to a type of waste disposal, and "final year" is more precise than "last year," improving the formality of the language.
"the other sectors experienced at a drop" -> "the other sectors experienced a decline"
Explanation: "Decline" is a more formal and precise term than "drop," which is more colloquial. This change enhances the academic tone.
"the number of Landfill declined rapidly from 1800 to 600 milion tonnes" -> "the volume of landfill waste declined sharply from 1,800 to 600 million tonnes"
Explanation: "Volume" is more precise, "sharply" conveys a stronger sense of change than "rapidly," and correcting "milion" to "million" ensures accuracy.
"the figue for Dumping at sea remained stable" -> "the figure for dumping at sea remained constant"
Explanation: "Constant" is a more precise term than "stable" in this context, and correcting "figue" to "figure" ensures accuracy.
"before dropping 20 milion tonnes in last years" -> "before decreasing by 20 million tonnes in the final year"
Explanation: "Decreasing by" is more precise than "dropping," and "final year" is more formal than "last years," improving clarity and formality.
"the number of Burning gradually increased from 460 to 900 throughout the process" -> "the volume of incineration gradually increased from 460 to 900 tonnes over the period"
Explanation: "Volume" is more precise, "incineration" is more formal than "Burning," and "over the period" is clearer than "throughout the process," enhancing the academic tone.
"which surpassed the figue for Landing in last year" -> "which surpassed the figure for landfill in the final year"
Explanation: Correcting "figue" to "figure" and using "landfill" instead of "Landing" ensures accuracy, while "final year" maintains formality.

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 in the data. The essay recounts detail mechanically with no clear overview. The essay presents, but inadequately covers, key features/bullet points. There is a tendency to focus on details.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clear overview of the main trends in the data. The essay should also focus on presenting the key features of the data, rather than simply recounting details. For example, the essay could state that the amount of landfill waste decreased significantly over the four years, while the amount of waste burned increased significantly. The essay could also highlight the fact that the amount of waste dumped at sea remained relatively stable.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0

Explanation: The essay presents information with some organization, but there are noticeable issues with overall progression. While it attempts to convey the changes in waste disposal methods, the lack of clear connections between ideas leads to confusion. The use of cohesive devices is inadequate and at times inaccurate, such as "besides" and "moreover," which do not effectively link the sentences. Additionally, the paragraphing is not clearly defined, making it difficult to follow the argument.

How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on logically organizing the information and ensuring a clear progression of ideas. Using a wider range of cohesive devices accurately and avoiding repetitive phrases would help. It is also essential to structure the essay into distinct paragraphs, each with a clear central topic, to improve readability and clarity.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of vocabulary, which is minimally adequate for the task. While it attempts to convey the main ideas from the chart, the use of vocabulary is basic and repetitive. There are noticeable errors in spelling (e.g., "milion" instead of "million," "figue" instead of "figure") and word formation (e.g., "amount of Burning" should be "amount of waste burned"). These errors may cause some difficulty for the reader in understanding the message clearly.

How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource, the writer should aim to use a wider range of vocabulary, including less common lexical items related to waste disposal. Additionally, improving spelling accuracy and ensuring correct word formation will help to convey ideas more clearly. Practicing synonyms and varying sentence structures can also contribute to a more sophisticated use of language.

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 sentences. While there are attempts at complex sentences, they are often inaccurate or poorly constructed. Frequent grammatical errors, such as "the amount of Burning grew" and "the figue for Dumping at sea remained stable," can cause some difficulty for the reader in understanding the intended meaning. Additionally, punctuation errors are present, which further detracts from the overall clarity and coherence of the essay.

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 their accuracy. This can be done by practicing sentence variety, such as using subordinate clauses and conjunctions effectively. Additionally, careful proofreading to eliminate spelling and punctuation errors will enhance the overall clarity of the writing. Engaging with model essays and grammar exercises can also help improve grammatical range and accuracy.

Bài sửa mẫu

The bar chart depicts the waste disposal methods in one European nation from 2005 to 2008.

From an overall perspective, the amount of waste disposed of by burning increased over the four years, surpassing landfill disposal to become the highest waste disposal method in the final year. The other sectors experienced a decline.

As can be inferred from the bar chart, the volume of landfill waste declined rapidly from 1,800 to 600 million tonnes over the four years. Additionally, the figure for dumping at sea remained stable at 600 million tonnes from 2005 to 2007 before dropping by 20 million tonnes in the last year.

Moreover, the amount of waste disposed of by burning gradually increased from 460 to 900 million tonnes throughout this period, surpassing the figure for landfill in the final year.