The graph and the chart below show the number of students choosing different kinds of courses in a university in 2012. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The given visualization effectively depicts the statistical variations in the total number of students and their corresponding six subject specifications by gender undertaken at an anonymous university in 2012.
At the outset, discernible divergences surfaced amid the variegated distributions, with a dichotomy arising between the prominently chosen technological sciences and unpopular agricultural fields. The illustration also indicates males’ persistently exalted participation in STEM majors, while demonstrating females’ proclivity for hospitality-and-interpersonal-centric related careers, showing evident gender-disproportionate resource allocation.
Notably experiencing higher metrics, the data for Social Sciences attendees notably exceeded the other subjects, claiming 7,000 students. This was followed by engineering placements, receiving 3,000 students, while health, humanities, and science and math registered close alignment without notable deviation if modest, admitting around 2,200 to 2,300 students. Remarkably, agriculture hosted a starkly lower number at fewer than 300 students, conspicuously being the smallest among the listed academic entities.
Regarding the gender-segregated records, STEM domains including engineering and science /math experienced higher data for males, outpacing their female counterparts by greater than 1,000 and nearly 500 students respectively. Meanwhile, social science, health, and humanities exhibited domination of females, outnumbering by more than 1,000 for the two former and by 500 for the latter. Finally, agricultural studies emerged as the solely area to achieved a manifest balance in the ratios from both sexes.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"The given visualization" -> "The provided visualization"
Explanation: "Provided" is more formal and precise than "given," which can sound slightly informal in academic contexts.
"discernible divergences surfaced" -> "discernible differences emerged"
Explanation: "Emerged" is more commonly used in academic writing to describe the appearance of differences or trends, whereas "surfaced" can imply a more sudden or unexpected occurrence.
"variegated distributions" -> "diverse distributions"
Explanation: "Diverse" is more straightforward and commonly used in academic writing to describe different types of data or distributions, whereas "variegated" is less commonly used and may sound overly complex.
"persistently exalted" -> "consistently higher"
Explanation: "Consistently higher" is more straightforward and academically appropriate than "persistently exalted," which can imply a sense of superiority that may not be intended.
"hospitality-and-interpersonal-centric" -> "hospitality and interpersonal-centric"
Explanation: Adding a hyphen after "hospitality" corrects the spacing for compound adjectives in English, adhering to standard grammatical rules.
"evident gender-disproportionate resource allocation" -> "clear gender imbalance in resource allocation"
Explanation: "Clear gender imbalance" is a more precise and commonly used term in academic discussions about gender disparities, replacing the less formal "evident gender-disproportionate."
"Notably experiencing higher metrics" -> "Notably exceeding higher numbers"
Explanation: "Exceeding higher numbers" is more direct and clear, avoiding the awkward phrasing of "experiencing higher metrics."
"claiming 7,000 students" -> "enrolled 7,000 students"
Explanation: "Enrolled" is more specific and appropriate in this context, indicating the number of students actually participating in the courses.
"engineering placements" -> "engineering enrollments"
Explanation: "Enrollments" is more specific and accurate in academic contexts, referring to the number of students registered in a particular field.
"without notable deviation if modest" -> "with only modest deviations"
Explanation: "With only modest deviations" is clearer and more direct, avoiding the awkward construction of "without notable deviation if modest."
"Remarkably, agriculture hosted" -> "Remarkably, agriculture had"
Explanation: "Had" is more appropriate in this context, indicating possession or occurrence, rather than "hosted," which is more commonly used for hosting events.
"STEM domains including engineering and science /math" -> "STEM fields including engineering and science/math"
Explanation: "Fields" is more precise than "domains" in this context, and removing the slash between "science" and "math" corrects the formatting for compound terms.
"outpacing their female counterparts by greater than 1,000 and nearly 500 students respectively" -> "exceeding their female counterparts by more than 1,000 and nearly 500 students each"
Explanation: "Exceeding" is more precise than "outpacing," and "each" clarifies that the numbers refer to each STEM field separately.
"social science, health, and humanities exhibited domination of females" -> "social science, health, and humanities showed a female dominance"
Explanation: "Showed a female dominance" is more formal and precise, replacing the less formal "exhibited domination."
"outnumbering by more than 1,000 for the two former and by 500 for the latter" -> "outnumbering the male counterparts by more than 1,000 in the two fields and by 500 in the latter"
Explanation: This revision clarifies the comparison and specifies the fields, improving clarity and precision.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay addresses the requirements of the task by providing an overview of the main features of the data. The essay presents information appropriately selected, but the details are sometimes irrelevant or inaccurate. For example, the essay states that "STEM domains including engineering and science /math experienced higher data for males, outpacing their female counterparts by greater than 1,000 and nearly 500 students respectively." However, the graph shows that the difference in the number of male and female students in engineering is greater than 1,000, but the difference in the number of male and female students in science and math is less than 500.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing more accurate and relevant details. The writer should also avoid making subjective statements, such as "showing evident gender-disproportionate resource allocation." Instead, the writer should focus on presenting the data objectively.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay arranges information and ideas coherently, presenting a clear overall progression. However, while it uses cohesive devices effectively, there are instances where cohesion within and between sentences may be faulty or mechanical. The paragraphing is present but not always logical, which affects the overall clarity of the essay. Some ideas could be better linked to enhance the flow of information.
How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the essay could benefit from clearer logical connections between sentences and paragraphs. Using a wider range of cohesive devices more naturally would improve the flow. Additionally, ensuring that each paragraph has a clear central topic and that the information is sequenced logically would enhance coherence. Lastly, reducing overly complex vocabulary in favor of clarity could help in making the ideas more accessible.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a sufficient range of vocabulary, allowing for some flexibility and precision in conveying the information. It employs less common lexical items, such as "discernible divergences," "variegated distributions," and "exalted participation," which shows an awareness of style and collocation. However, there are occasional inaccuracies in word choice, such as "hospitality-and-interpersonal-centric related careers," which could be expressed more clearly. Additionally, minor errors in spelling and word formation are present, such as "achieved" instead of "achieve," which detracts slightly from the overall effectiveness. These factors indicate that while the vocabulary is adequate and varied, it does not fully meet the criteria for a higher band score.

How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource score, the writer should focus on refining word choice for clarity and precision. Avoiding overly complex or awkward phrases can help improve readability. Additionally, ensuring accuracy in spelling and word formation is crucial. Expanding the use of sophisticated vocabulary while maintaining naturalness will also contribute to achieving a higher band score. Engaging in more varied reading and writing practice can aid in developing a more nuanced and flexible vocabulary.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a variety of complex structures and produces frequent error-free sentences. The writer shows good control of grammar and punctuation, but there are a few errors that detract from the overall clarity. For example, phrases like "hospitality-and-interpersonal-centric related careers" could be simplified for better readability. Additionally, the sentence "agricultural studies emerged as the solely area to achieved a manifest balance in the ratios from both sexes" contains grammatical inaccuracies that affect the flow of the text. Overall, the essay meets the criteria for Band 7 due to its effective use of complex structures and a generally high level of grammatical control, despite some errors.

How to improve:

Simplify Complex Structures: Aim to simplify overly complex phrases to enhance clarity and readability. For instance, consider rephrasing "hospitality-and-interpersonal-centric related careers" to "careers related to hospitality and interpersonal skills."
Proofreading for Errors: Regularly proofread your work to catch minor grammatical errors, such as subject-verb agreement and incorrect verb forms (e.g., "to achieved" should be "to achieve").
Variety in Sentence Length: While the essay uses a variety of complex structures, incorporating a mix of shorter sentences can improve the overall flow and make the writing more engaging.
Consistent Terminology: Ensure that terminology is used consistently and accurately throughout the essay to avoid confusion. For example, clarify what "STEM" encompasses if it is mentioned for the first time.

By focusing on these areas, the essay could potentially reach a higher band score.

Bài sửa mẫu

At the outset, discernible divergences surfaced amid the varied distributions, with a dichotomy arising between the prominently chosen technological sciences and the less popular agricultural fields. The illustration also indicates males’ consistently higher participation in STEM majors, while demonstrating females’ preference for hospitality and interpersonal-centric careers, showing evident gender-disproportionate resource allocation.

Notably experiencing higher metrics, the data for Social Sciences attendees significantly exceeded the other subjects, claiming 7,000 students. This was followed by engineering placements, which received 3,000 students, while health, humanities, and science and math registered close alignment without notable deviation, admitting around 2,200 to 2,300 students. Remarkably, agriculture hosted a starkly lower number at fewer than 300 students, conspicuously being the smallest among the listed academic fields.

Regarding the gender-segregated records, STEM domains including engineering and science/math experienced higher numbers for males, outpacing their female counterparts by more than 1,000 and nearly 500 students respectively. Meanwhile, social science, health, and humanities exhibited a dominance of females, outnumbering males by more than 1,000 for the two former and by 500 for the latter. Finally, agricultural studies emerged as the only area to achieve a manifest balance in the ratios from both sexes.