The charts below show the performance of spending on roads and transport in four countries from 1990 to 2005. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The charts below show the performance of spending on roads and transport in four countries from 1990 to 2005.

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

The given chart delineates the changes in government expenditure on infrastructures including roads and transports across several nations from 1990 to 2005.

Overall, it is readily apparent that Portugal government consistently upheld its status of the highest spender among the countries scrutinized. Another interesting point is that state funding for roads and transports in all countries in question experienced decreasing trajectories over the years.

In 1990, more than a quarter of Portuguese national budget was responsible for roads and transports, afterwhich this figure had declined significantly to 20% by 1995 and continued its decrease to end the period at just over 15%. Italy’s state investment, meanwhile, generally mirrored the same pattern, albeit at a lower extent, diminishing from 20% to nearly 15% in the final year.

Starting from the lowest base with a precise 10% , financial allowance drawn up from the UK national government then exhibited a modest increase in its figure to culminate at nearly 15% in 1995 before dipping significantly to around 7% by 2005, maintaining the lowest spending among the listed nations. Meanwhile, the USA’s government expenditure directed towards roads and transportation systems witnessed no significant difference during the whole time frame, with its figures hovering at around nearly 15%.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

1. "delineates" -> "depicts"
   Explanation: "Depicts" is a more direct and common verb for describing visual representations like charts, making the sentence more accessible without sacrificing sophistication.

2. "on infrastructures including roads and transports" -> "on infrastructure, particularly roads and transportation"
   Explanation: "Infrastructure" should be used in its singular form when referring to an integrated set of systems and facilities. "Transportation" is a more standard term than "transports," which is less commonly used in this context.

3. "Portugal government" -> "Portuguese government"
   Explanation: The adjective "Portuguese" correctly modifies "government," adhering to the grammatical rule of using an adjective to describe a noun, rather than using the noun form of the country.

4. "consistently upheld its status of the highest spender" -> "consistently maintained its status as the highest spender"
   Explanation: "Maintained its status as" is a more natural phrasing than "upheld its status of," which is awkward and uncommon in English.

5. "scrutinized" -> "analyzed"
   Explanation: "Analyzed" is a more precise and commonly used term in the context of examining data or statistics, whereas "scrutinized" might imply a more critical examination.

6. "afterwhich" -> "after which"
   Explanation: "After which" should be two separate words in this context, as it follows a clause and introduces another.

7. "lowest base with a precise 10%" -> "lowest starting point at exactly 10%"
   Explanation: "Starting point" is more specific than "base," which can be ambiguous, and "exactly" is commonly used with percentages to indicate precision.

8. "financial allowance drawn up from" -> "funding allocated by"
   Explanation: "Funding allocated by" is clearer and more formal than "financial allowance drawn up from," which is awkward and less precise in the context of government budget descriptions.

9. "exhibited a modest increase" -> "showed a slight increase"
   Explanation: "Showed" is simpler and more direct than "exhibited," which can be overly formal and less common in casual descriptions. "Slight" aligns better with the context of a small change in percentages.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 7

[
Band Score: 7.0
Explanation:
The essay adequately covers the requirements of the task by providing a clear overview of the main trends in government expenditure on roads and transport in the four countries from 1990 to 2005. It presents key features such as the consistent high spending of Portugal, the decreasing trajectories of spending in all countries, and specific percentage changes over the years for each country.
How to improve:
To improve, the essay could further extend its analysis by providing more detailed comparisons between the countries and by ensuring that all information presented is accurate and relevant. Additionally, a stronger conclusion summarizing the main points of the analysis could enhance the overall coherence of the essay.
]

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a clear overall progression, with each paragraph focusing on a specific aspect of the data provided. The introduction sets the context effectively, outlining the main trends observed in the charts. The body paragraphs present a coherent analysis of the data, discussing the spending trends of each country over the specified time period. The use of transition words and phrases helps to connect ideas and maintain coherence. However, there are instances where cohesion within and between sentences could be improved for smoother transitions. Additionally, while paragraphing is used, it is not consistently logical, as some paragraphs contain multiple points that could be better separated for clarity.

How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, ensure that each paragraph focuses on a single main idea or aspect of the data. Use clear topic sentences to introduce the main point of each paragraph and provide smooth transitions between sentences and paragraphs to guide the reader through the analysis more effectively. Additionally, consider refining paragraph structure to ensure that each paragraph contains only one main idea, making the organization of ideas clearer.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a sufficient range of vocabulary with some flexibility and precision. It effectively utilizes vocabulary related to government expenditure, infrastructure, and economic trends. The writer employs less common lexical items such as "culminate," "diminishing," and "trajectory," showcasing some awareness of style and collocation. However, there are occasional inaccuracies in word choice and collocation, such as "end the period at just over 15%" could be more smoothly phrased. Additionally, some phrases like "afterwhich" could be replaced with more standard expressions. Overall, the vocabulary usage allows for flexibility and clarity in conveying the main ideas.

How to improve:
To enhance the lexical resource further, focus on refining word choice and collocation to ensure precision and fluency. Avoid uncommon phrases that may disrupt the flow of the essay and opt for more standard expressions. Proofreading for consistency in vocabulary usage and eliminating minor errors in word choice can help improve the overall lexical quality.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a good level of grammatical range and accuracy, placing it in the Band 7 category. It effectively uses a variety of complex structures and produces frequent error-free sentences. The essay maintains good control of grammar and punctuation, although there are a few errors present.

How to improve: To improve to a Band 8 or higher, focus on refining the accuracy further by paying attention to sentence structure and grammatical nuances. Ensure that complex sentences are constructed accurately to convey ideas clearly. Additionally, proofreading for minor errors in punctuation and grammar can help elevate the overall quality of the writing.

Bài sửa mẫu

The provided charts illustrate the trends in government spending on infrastructure, specifically roads and transport, across four countries from 1990 to 2005.

It is evident that Portugal consistently maintained its position as the highest spender among the nations examined. Additionally, a notable trend across all countries was a decline in state funding for roads and transport throughout the specified period.

In 1990, Portugal allocated over a quarter of its national budget to roads and transport, which decreased to approximately 20% by 1995 and further declined to slightly over 15% by 2005. Similarly, Italy’s government expenditure followed a similar trajectory, albeit at a lower scale, decreasing from around 20% to nearly 15% by the end of the period.

Beginning with the lowest allocation at precisely 10%, the United Kingdom’s funding from the national government experienced a modest increase to almost 15% in 1995 before declining sharply to around 7% by 2005, maintaining the lowest spending among the countries listed. Meanwhile, the United States’ government expenditure on roads and transportation remained relatively stable throughout the entire duration, hovering at nearly 15%.