The charts below show the percentages of food and goods bought in supermarkets in European countries in 1998 and 2008.

The charts below illustrated the amount of food and goods present in percentage that are bought in supermarkets in European countries in two separate years , 1998 and 2008
From my perspective, it is clear that the percentage of food and goods bought by country 1 in European in 2008 had the highest percentage. Moreover, food and goods were bought in country 2 reached the highest percentage among 3 country in 1998 . In contrast , the country that bought food and goods least in both year among 3 country was country 3.
According to the chart of food that were bought in 1998 and 2008 , we could definitely saw that the percentage of food were bought in country 1 in 1998 was 10% and it made a significant rise to 35% in 2008. Moreover, country 2 with 23% of food have been bought in 1998 have rose up by 4% in 2008. Furthermore, the country 3 of Europe in 1998 have bought 7% of food and made a slight growth up to 9% of food bought in 2008 . We could see by this data, country 3 weren’t buying food as much as country 1 and country 2 and country 1 are the leader of food buying percentage chart
According to the chart of goods that were bought in 1998 and 2008 , we could definitely saw that the percent of goods were bought in country 1 were 5% and it had made a dramatic rise to 40% in 2008. Another striking feature that country 2 had made was , the percentage of food have been bought was 24% in 1998 and rose up to 27% in 2008.Moreover, the percentage of food have been bought that have written down for country 3 in 1998 was 2% and it had made a significant rise to 14% in 2008

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"illustrated the amount of food and goods present in percentage" -> "illustrated the percentage of food and goods available"
Explanation: The phrase "amount of food and goods present in percentage" is awkward and unclear. "Percentage of food and goods available" is more precise and maintains clarity.
"by country 1 in European in 2008 had the highest percentage" -> "by Country 1 in Europe in 2008 had the highest proportion"
Explanation: "European" should be "Europe" to correctly refer to the continent. Additionally, "proportion" is a more precise term than "percentage" in this context.
"country 2 reached the highest percentage among 3 country in 1998" -> "Country 2 reached the highest percentage among the three countries in 1998"
Explanation: "3 country" should be "the three countries" for grammatical correctness and clarity.
"the country that bought food and goods least in both year among 3 country was country 3" -> "the country that purchased the least food and goods in both years among the three countries was Country 3"
Explanation: "bought" is too informal; "purchased" is more appropriate for academic writing. "least in both year" should be "least in both years" for grammatical accuracy.
"we could definitely saw that the percentage of food were bought" -> "it is evident that the percentage of food purchased"
Explanation: "we could definitely saw" is grammatically incorrect; "it is evident" is a more formal and accurate expression. "were bought" should be "purchased" for improved formality.
"country 2 with 23% of food have been bought in 1998 have rose up by 4% in 2008" -> "Country 2, which had 23% of food purchased in 1998, increased by 4% in 2008"
Explanation: "have been bought" is awkward; "purchased" is more formal. "have rose up" should be "increased" for grammatical correctness.
"the country 3 of Europe in 1998 have bought 7% of food and made a slight growth up to 9% of food bought in 2008" -> "Country 3 in Europe purchased 7% of food in 1998 and experienced a slight increase to 9% in 2008"
Explanation: "the country 3 of Europe" is awkward; "Country 3 in Europe" is clearer. "made a slight growth" should be "experienced a slight increase" for improved precision and formality.
"country 3 weren’t buying food as much as country 1 and country 2" -> "Country 3 purchased significantly less food than Country 1 and Country 2"
Explanation: "weren’t buying food as much as" is informal; "purchased significantly less food than" is more precise and formal.
"country 1 are the leader of food buying percentage chart" -> "Country 1 is the leader in the food purchasing percentage chart"
Explanation: "are" should be "is" for subject-verb agreement. "food buying percentage chart" should be "food purchasing percentage chart" for improved formality.
"the percent of goods were bought in country 1 were 5%" -> "the percentage of goods purchased in Country 1 was 5%"
Explanation: "percent" should be "percentage" for formality, and "were" should be "was" for subject-verb agreement.
"it had made a dramatic rise to 40% in 2008" -> "it increased dramatically to 40% in 2008"
Explanation: "had made a dramatic rise" is awkward; "increased dramatically" is more concise and formal.
"the percentage of food have been bought was 24% in 1998 and rose up to 27% in 2008" -> "the percentage of food purchased was 24% in 1998 and rose to 27% in 2008"
Explanation: "have been bought" is awkward; "purchased" is more formal. "rose up to" should be "rose to" for conciseness.
"the percentage of food have been bought that have written down for country 3 in 1998 was 2%" -> "the percentage of food purchased for Country 3 in 1998 was 2%"
Explanation: "have been bought that have written down" is convoluted; "purchased for" is clearer and more concise.
"it had made a significant rise to 14% in 2008" -> "it increased significantly to 14% in 2008"
Explanation: "had made a significant rise" is awkward; "increased significantly" is more direct and formal.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 4

Band Score: 4

Explanation: The essay attempts to address the task but does not cover all key features/bullet points. The essay does not provide a clear overview of the main trends, differences or stages. The essay also confuses key features/bullet points with detail. For example, the essay states that "country 1 in 2008 had the highest percentage" but does not provide any specific data to support this claim. The essay also states that "country 3 weren’t buying food as much as country 1 and country 2" but does not provide any specific data to support this claim.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clear overview of the main trends, differences or stages. The essay could also be improved by providing specific data to support the claims made. For example, the essay could state that "the percentage of food bought in country 1 increased from 10% in 1998 to 35% in 2008, while the percentage of goods bought in country 1 increased from 5% in 1998 to 40% in 2008." The essay could also be improved by using more precise language. For example, instead of saying "country 3 weren’t buying food as much as country 1 and country 2," the essay could say "country 3 had the lowest percentage of food bought in both 1998 and 2008."

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0

Explanation: The essay presents information with some organization, but there is a noticeable lack of overall progression. While the writer attempts to compare the data from 1998 and 2008, the structure is somewhat confusing, and the ideas do not flow logically from one to the next. There are instances of inadequate and repetitive use of cohesive devices, such as "Moreover" and "According to the chart," which detracts from the clarity of the writing. The paragraphing is present but not always logical, as the information about food and goods is mixed together without clear separation.

How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on creating a clearer structure by separating the analysis of food and goods into distinct paragraphs. Additionally, varying the use of cohesive devices and ensuring that each paragraph presents a clear central topic will help improve the overall flow of the essay. Using more precise referencing and avoiding repetition will also contribute to a more coherent response.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of vocabulary that is minimally adequate for the task. While the writer attempts to convey information about the charts, the vocabulary used is often repetitive and lacks precision. There are noticeable errors in word choice, such as "illustrated the amount of food and goods present in percentage" and "we could definitely saw," which detract from the overall clarity. Additionally, spelling and grammatical errors, such as "country 1 in European" and "the country 3 of Europe," may cause some difficulty for the reader. Overall, the essay meets the basic requirements but does not show sufficient control or flexibility in vocabulary.

How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource, the writer should focus on expanding their vocabulary by incorporating more varied and precise terms related to the topic. Practicing the use of synonyms and less common lexical items can improve the sophistication of the writing. Additionally, careful proofreading to correct spelling and grammatical errors will help to ensure that the message is communicated clearly and effectively. Engaging with high-quality sample essays can also provide insights into effective vocabulary usage in similar contexts.

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 sentence forms. While there are attempts to use complex sentences, they often lack accuracy, leading to grammatical errors that can cause some difficulty for the reader. For instance, phrases like "the amount of food and goods present in percentage that are bought" are awkwardly constructed and unclear. Additionally, errors in subject-verb agreement, such as "country 3 weren’t buying food," detract from the overall clarity. Punctuation errors are also present, which further complicates comprehension.

How to improve: To enhance the grammatical range and accuracy, the writer should focus on the following areas:

Expand Sentence Variety: Incorporate a greater mix of complex and compound sentences to demonstrate a wider range of grammatical structures.
Improve Accuracy: Pay closer attention to subject-verb agreement and ensure that sentences are grammatically correct.
Punctuation: Review punctuation rules to avoid errors that can obscure meaning.
Clarity and Cohesion: Aim for clearer expression of ideas by restructuring awkward phrases and ensuring that each sentence logically follows the previous one. This will improve overall readability and coherence.

Bài sửa mẫu

The charts below illustrate the percentages of food and goods purchased in supermarkets across European countries in two separate years, 1998 and 2008.

From my perspective, it is clear that the percentage of food and goods bought by Country 1 in Europe in 2008 was the highest. Moreover, in 1998, the percentage of food and goods purchased in Country 2 reached the highest level among the three countries. In contrast, Country 3 consistently had the lowest percentage of food and goods purchased in both years.

According to the chart for food purchases in 1998 and 2008, it is evident that the percentage of food bought in Country 1 in 1998 was 10%, which rose significantly to 35% in 2008. Additionally, Country 2, which had 23% of food purchased in 1998, increased by 4% in 2008. Furthermore, Country 3 in Europe purchased 7% of food in 1998, experiencing a slight growth to 9% in 2008. This data indicates that Country 3 did not buy as much food as Country 1 and Country 2, with Country 1 leading in the food purchasing percentage.

Regarding the chart for goods purchased in 1998 and 2008, it is clear that the percentage of goods bought in Country 1 was 5%, which dramatically rose to 40% in 2008. Another notable feature is that Country 2 had a percentage of goods purchased at 24% in 1998, which increased to 27% in 2008. Moreover, the percentage of goods purchased in Country 3 in 1998 was 2%, which saw a significant rise to 14% in 2008.