The first graph shows the number of train passengers from 2000 to 2009. The second graph shows the percentage of trains running on time

The charts illustrate the number of train customers from 2000 to 2009 compared to the proportion of trains that ran on time.

Overall, there was a fluctuation in train users and the figure of the train had an accurate schedule witnessed the mirror trend.

Looking at the graph, people who went by rail initially at 38 million, before decreasing to 43 million in 2002. After falling to the initial data in 2003, the figure increased gradually and peaked at 49 million in 2005. The number of passengers dropped again until 2008 and rose to around 42 customers at the end of the period.

Regarding the remaining, the train that obeyed the time was 92 per cent at the beginning. After that, they increased and passed the standard live target in 2002 before hiking to 96 per cent in 2008. After falling back to the initial data in 2006, they surged until 2008 and remain unchanged.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"The charts illustrate" -> "The graphs depict"
Explanation: "Depict" is a more precise term in academic contexts, suggesting a detailed and accurate representation, which is more suitable for describing data visualization.
"number of train customers" -> "number of train passengers"
Explanation: "Passengers" is the standard term used in transportation contexts, whereas "customers" could imply a commercial or service-oriented relationship, which is less accurate here.
"compared to the proportion of trains that ran on time" -> "compared to the proportion of trains that arrived on schedule"
Explanation: "Arrived on schedule" is a more specific and formal way to describe the punctuality of trains, enhancing the academic tone.
"witnessed the mirror trend" -> "followed a similar trend"
Explanation: "Witnessed the mirror trend" is awkward and unclear. "Followed a similar trend" is clearer and more appropriate for academic writing.
"people who went by rail" -> "passengers"
Explanation: "Passengers" is the standard term for individuals traveling by rail, making it more precise and formal.
"the figure of the train had an accurate schedule" -> "the punctuality of the trains"
Explanation: "Punctuality" directly addresses the topic of trains arriving on schedule, making the phrase more concise and academically appropriate.
"witnessed the mirror trend" -> "followed a similar trend" (as mentioned earlier)
Explanation: Again, "witnessed the mirror trend" is awkward and unclear; "followed a similar trend" is clearer and more formal.
"rose to around 42 customers" -> "increased to approximately 42 million passengers"
Explanation: "Customers" is incorrect in this context; "passengers" is the correct term. Also, "approximately" is more precise than "around" in academic writing.
"Regarding the remaining, the train that obeyed the time" -> "Regarding the remaining trains, those that operated on schedule"
Explanation: "Regarding the remaining" is grammatically incorrect and vague. "Regarding the remaining trains" is grammatically correct and clearer. "Operated on schedule" is more formal than "obeyed the time."
"standard live target" -> "standard on-time performance target"
Explanation: "Standard live target" is unclear and incorrect. "Standard on-time performance target" is specific and appropriate for discussing punctuality in a formal context.
"hiking to 96 per cent" -> "increased to 96%"
Explanation: "Hiking" is an informal term and not suitable for academic writing. "Increased" is the correct verb for describing a numerical change.
"surged until 2008 and remain unchanged" -> "increased until 2008 and remained unchanged"
Explanation: "Remain" should be "remained" for grammatical correctness, and "increased" is more formal than "surged" in this context.

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

How to improve: The essay needs to provide a clear overview of the main trends in the data. The essay should also provide more specific data to support the description. The essay should avoid focusing on details and instead focus on the overall trends in the data. The essay should also be more concise and avoid unnecessary repetition. For example, the essay could be improved by stating that the number of train passengers fluctuated between 2000 and 2009, with a peak in 2005. The essay could also state that the percentage of trains running on time generally increased between 2000 and 2009, with a dip in 2006. The essay should also avoid using informal language, such as "the figure of the train had an accurate schedule witnessed the mirror trend." Instead, the essay should use more formal language, such as "the percentage of trains running on time mirrored the trend in the number of train passengers."

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 it attempts to describe the trends in both graphs, the connections between the two data sets are not clearly articulated. The use of cohesive devices is inadequate and at times inaccurate, leading to confusion in the reader’s understanding. Additionally, the paragraphing is not effectively utilized, as the ideas do not flow logically from one to the next, and there are instances of repetition and vague references.
How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on clearly structuring the essay with distinct paragraphs that each contain a single main idea. Using a wider range of cohesive devices appropriately will help to create smoother transitions between sentences and paragraphs. Furthermore, ensuring that references are clear and that there is a logical progression of ideas will improve the overall clarity of the essay. Finally, providing a more detailed analysis of the relationship between the two graphs would strengthen the 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 it attempts to convey information about the graphs, the use of vocabulary is repetitive and at times inappropriate, such as "the figure of the train had an accurate schedule" and "the remaining." There are noticeable errors in word choice and collocation, which may cause some difficulty for the reader. Additionally, spelling errors, such as "customers" instead of "passengers," detract from the overall clarity of the essay.

How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource score, the writer should aim to expand their vocabulary by incorporating a wider range of synonyms and phrases relevant to the topic. Practicing the use of less common lexical items and ensuring that they are used accurately in context can improve precision. Furthermore, attention should be given to spelling and word formation to reduce errors that impede communication. Reading more high-quality essays and practicing paraphrasing can also help develop a more sophisticated vocabulary.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of grammatical structures, primarily using simple sentences with some attempts at complex sentences. However, there are frequent grammatical errors, particularly in subject-verb agreement and word choice, which can cause difficulty for the reader. For instance, phrases like "the figure of the train had an accurate schedule witnessed the mirror trend" are awkward and unclear. Additionally, there are issues with punctuation and clarity, such as "the remaining" and "the train that obeyed the time," which do not convey the intended meaning effectively. Overall, while the essay attempts to present information, the grammatical inaccuracies hinder clear communication.

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

Expand Sentence Variety: Incorporate a greater variety of complex sentence structures, ensuring that subordinate clauses are used correctly.
Proofreading: Review the essay for grammatical errors and awkward phrasing. Reading aloud can help identify sentences that may not flow well.
Use Accurate Vocabulary: Ensure that word choices are appropriate for the context. For example, instead of "the remaining," a clearer phrase could be "in terms of punctuality."
Practice Grammar Exercises: Engage in targeted grammar exercises to strengthen understanding of subject-verb agreement, punctuation, and sentence structure.
Seek Feedback: Obtain feedback from peers or instructors to identify specific areas of weakness and work on them systematically.

Bài sửa mẫu

The charts illustrate the number of train passengers from 2000 to 2009 compared to the percentage of trains that ran on time.

Overall, there was a fluctuation in the number of train users, and the percentage of trains adhering to their schedules exhibited a similar trend.

Looking at the graph, the number of people traveling by rail started at 38 million before decreasing to 34 million in 2002. After falling to the initial figure in 2003, the number increased gradually and peaked at 49 million in 2005. The number of passengers dropped again until 2008 and rose to around 42 million by the end of the period.

Regarding the other graph, the percentage of trains running on time was 92 percent at the beginning. This figure increased and surpassed the target level in 2002 before rising to 96 percent in 2008. After falling back to the initial figure in 2006, it surged until 2008 and remained unchanged thereafter.