The chart shows information about the number of customers at three different restaurants during a five-day period.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the key features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The line graph shows the quantity of diners, who paid a visit to restaurants divided in to three various reataurants over the last five days.
A glance at the chart reveals that guests who came to Mama’s Café and Tom’s Diner fluctuated, while the figure for Good Eats ascended continually and reached a peak at the end of the period among three eateries.
It is clear form the data that on the first day, Mama’s Café served nearly 200 people, whereas the patrons of Tom’s Diner and Good Eats reached the number of 50 and 150 respectively. In the 5 recent days, the guests to Good Eats grew steadily and stood at 220 people on the last day. By contrast, the figures for the other diners varied consistently over the term.
On the next two days, the figure for Mama Café shrank consistently and hit a low of nearly 100 people while the number of visiters to Tom’s Diner went down and up several times then reached the number of almost 50. Between day two and day five, customers who ate at Mama’s Café rockted from just over 100 people to about 220 people then remained steady. There was a substantial decrease in the number of people Tom’s Diner served, hit a low of 0 on day 4 and bounced back to about 20 at the end of the period.
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
Errors and Improvements:
"divided in to" -> "divided into"
Explanation: The correct phrase is "divided into." It maintains proper grammar and usage.
"reataurants" -> "restaurants"
Explanation: The correct spelling is "restaurants." Correcting the spelling error improves the overall quality of the writing.
"ascended continually" -> "steadily increased"
Explanation: "Steadily increased" is a more precise and formal way to express the upward trend, enhancing the clarity and sophistication of the description.
"form" -> "from"
Explanation: The correct preposition in this context is "from," not "form." This correction ensures grammatical accuracy.
"By contrast" -> "In contrast"
Explanation: "In contrast" is a more commonly used and appropriate phrase to introduce a comparison between two sets of data.
"rockted" -> "rocketed"
Explanation: The correct spelling is "rocketed." This correction addresses the spelling error and improves the overall readability of the text.
"hit a low of 0" -> "reached a minimum of 0"
Explanation: Using "reached a minimum of 0" provides a clearer and more formal description of hitting the lowest point, avoiding potential ambiguity.
"bounced back" -> "recovered"
Explanation: "Recovered" is a more formal and precise term to describe an increase after a decrease, contributing to a more sophisticated expression.
Note: The essay could benefit from additional improvements, such as refining sentence structures for better coherence and clarity.
Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 7
Band Score: 7.0
The essay effectively addresses the requirements of the task by presenting a clear overview of the main trends in the number of customers at three different restaurants over a five-day period. The key features, such as fluctuations and peaks in customer numbers, are highlighted for each restaurant. The data is accurately conveyed, providing a coherent summary.
How to improve:
To improve the Task Achievement score, consider extending the analysis of key features for each restaurant. While the essay presents a clear overview, some details could be more fully developed to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the trends. Additionally, ensure that the language used is more precise and grammatically accurate to enhance clarity and coherence in conveying the information.
Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6
Band Score: 6.0
The essay presents a coherent structure with a clear introduction and conclusion. It attempts to organize information logically, following the sequence of days and restaurants. Paragraphing is evident but lacks consistency and logical flow at times, especially in transitions between different days and restaurants. There’s an effort to use cohesive devices, although there are some issues with cohesion within and between sentences.
The essay provides a summary of the data presented in the chart, offering comparisons and describing fluctuations in customer numbers. However, the coherence suffers due to inconsistencies in the use of tenses, inaccuracies in expressions, and occasional imprecise language, impacting overall coherence and cohesion.
How to improve:
- Consistent Verb Tense: Maintain consistency in verb tenses to improve clarity and coherence.
- Precision in Expressions: Use precise language to avoid ambiguity and inaccuracies in conveying information.
- Logical Transitions: Ensure smoother transitions between sentences and paragraphs to enhance overall coherence.
- Varied Cohesive Devices: Expand the use of cohesive devices beyond repetition and explore a wider range of linking words to improve coherence.
Improving these aspects will elevate the coherence and cohesion of the essay, enhancing its overall structure and clarity.
Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6
Band Score: 6.0
The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, covering essential aspects of the chart. The writer attempts to use less common vocabulary, but there are some inaccuracies in word choice and collocation. For example, "reataurants" should be "restaurants," and "rockted" should be "rocketed." Additionally, there are occasional errors in spelling and word formation, such as "visiters" instead of "visitors." Despite these issues, the communication is generally clear, and the key features of the chart are adequately summarized.
How to improve:
To enhance the Lexical Resource and achieve a higher band score, focus on using a more varied and precise vocabulary. Pay attention to word choice and collocation to ensure accuracy. Proofread the essay carefully to eliminate spelling and word formation errors. Additionally, aim for more sophisticated expressions and try to avoid repetitive language. This will contribute to a more polished and refined lexical presentation.
Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6
Band Score: 6.0
The essay demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, incorporating varied sentence forms. It attempts to convey information about the given chart, providing an overview of the fluctuations in customer numbers across the mentioned restaurants over a five-day period. There’s an effort to use complex structures, though these instances sometimes lack accuracy.
The essay makes several errors in grammar and punctuation, but these errors generally do not significantly hinder communication. Some sentences lack clarity due to grammar issues, impacting the readability and coherence of the essay. For instance, there are inconsistencies in verb tenses ("fluctuated," "ascended," "stood," "went down," "rockted") and occasional awkward phrasing that affects the precision of the conveyed information.
How to improve:
To enhance the grammatical range and accuracy, focus on refining sentence structures and ensuring consistency in verb tenses throughout the essay. Review and revise the phrasing to improve clarity and coherence. Work on accurate usage of punctuation marks, especially commas and apostrophes, to enhance the overall readability of the essay. Additionally, aiming for more precise vocabulary and using more sophisticated sentence structures can elevate the overall quality of expression.
Bài sửa mẫu
The provided line graph illustrates the customer turnout at three distinct restaurants over a span of five days.
Upon careful examination, it is evident that the number of patrons at Mama’s Café and Tom’s Diner experienced fluctuations, while Good Eats witnessed a consistent increase, reaching its zenith on the final day.
On the initial day, Mama’s Café served nearly 200 individuals, whereas Tom’s Diner and Good Eats accommodated around 50 and 150 customers, respectively. Over the subsequent five days, Good Eats witnessed a steady rise, culminating in 220 patrons on the fifth day. In stark contrast, the figures for Mama’s Café oscillated initially, eventually stabilizing at approximately 220 customers. Tom’s Diner, on the other hand, displayed erratic trends, with a noticeable decline to zero on day 4 and a subsequent recovery to around 20 by the conclusion of the period.
To elaborate further, Mama’s Café experienced a consistent decline over the following two days, reaching a minimum of nearly 100 customers, after which the numbers surged, settling at the aforementioned 220. Simultaneously, Tom’s Diner displayed a series of fluctuations, dropping and rising intermittently, ultimately plateauing at nearly 50 patrons.
In summary, while Mama’s Café and Tom’s Diner witnessed fluctuations in customer numbers, Good Eats demonstrated a consistent upward trajectory, making it the most frequented restaurant by the end of the five-day period.