The graph below shows the average monthly change in the prices of three materials during 2014. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The given graph illustrates the every months up and down costs of three different solid materials, including copper, nickel, and zinc over 2014.
As can be seen clearly, while nickel and copper witnessed a decrease in prices during the year, the opposite side can be observed at zinc. The most remarkable feature can be seen in Nickel, which had the most significant drop in cost during 2014 among these three metals.
In the first month of the year, nickel hold the lion’s share as the most expensive metal, which three times higher than that figure of copper and six times higher than the cost of zinc. In the following 5 months, it can be observed that all of the three materials witnessed a downward trend in their worth. Zinc and copper experienced a rough decrease in cost with 20% and 25% in perspective, with an increase in price in a short period of zinc in February, whereas nickel’s price declined sharply by 90% in comparison with the beginning of the period.
Copper was the most worthy material in almost the last of the period until the end of August, with a 10% increase in its price, before being surpassed by zinc and nickel. At the end of the period, zinc transformed from the lowest metal in price to the highest one, which was followed by copper and nickel, creating a tiny gap in cost among these 3 solid materials.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"every months" -> "each month"
Explanation: "Each month" is the correct phrase to use when referring to the monthly periods in the graph, whereas "every months" is grammatically incorrect and awkwardly phrased.
"up and down costs" -> "fluctuations in cost"
Explanation: "Fluctuations in cost" is a more precise and formal term that accurately describes the changes in price over time, avoiding the colloquial and vague "up and down costs."
"the opposite side can be observed at zinc" -> "the opposite trend was observed in zinc"
Explanation: "The opposite trend was observed in zinc" is more precise and academically appropriate, clearly indicating the direction of change in zinc’s price compared to the other two metals.
"hold the lion’s share" -> "was the most expensive"
Explanation: "Hold the lion’s share" is an idiom that is too informal for academic writing. "Was the most expensive" is straightforward and maintains a formal tone.
"three times higher" -> "threefold higher"
Explanation: "Threefold higher" is a more precise and formal way to express the comparative increase in cost, aligning better with academic style.
"rough decrease" -> "significant decrease"
Explanation: "Rough" is vague and informal; "significant" is more specific and appropriate for academic writing, indicating the magnitude of the decrease.
"in perspective" -> "respectively"
Explanation: "Respectively" is the correct term for referring to multiple items in a list, whereas "in perspective" is not appropriate here.
"in a short period of zinc" -> "in the short term"
Explanation: "In the short term" is a more formal and precise way to describe a brief period of time, avoiding the awkward and unclear "in a short period of zinc."
"most worthy material" -> "most valuable material"
Explanation: "Most worthy material" is awkward and unclear; "most valuable material" is the correct term for describing something of great worth or value.
"tiny gap in cost" -> "small difference in cost"
Explanation: "Small difference in cost" is a more precise and formal way to describe the variation in prices among the metals, avoiding the colloquial "tiny gap."

These changes enhance the formality, clarity, and precision of the text, making it more suitable for an academic 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 present a clear overview of the main trends, differences, or stages. The essay focuses on details and does not adequately cover the key features/bullet points.

How to improve: The essay should present a clear overview of the main trends, differences, or stages. The essay should also adequately cover the key features/bullet points. The essay should avoid focusing on details and instead focus on the main features of the graph. For example, the essay could state that nickel experienced the most significant drop in price during the year, while zinc experienced the most significant increase in price. The essay could also state that copper was the most expensive material for most of the year, but was surpassed by zinc and nickel at the end of the year.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates some organization with a basic introduction and a general progression of ideas. However, there are significant coherence and cohesion issues that prevent it from achieving a higher band score. There is a lack of overall progression in presenting the information from the graph, and the use of cohesive devices is inadequate and sometimes inaccurate. Paragraphing is attempted but is not always logical or effective in separating ideas.

How to improve:

Logical Organization: Ensure a clear structure that follows the progression of information from the graph. Start with an overview and then detail specific trends or comparisons.
Cohesive Devices: Use a variety of cohesive devices more effectively to connect sentences and ideas logically. Avoid inaccuracies and ensure these devices enhance coherence rather than detract from it.
Paragraphing: Improve the logical flow between paragraphs. Each paragraph should focus on a central theme or trend, contributing to a clearer overall structure of the essay.

By addressing these aspects, the coherence and cohesion of the essay can be significantly improved, potentially achieving a higher band score.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a basic range of vocabulary suitable for the task. There is some attempt to convey the information using relevant terms such as "materials," "costs," "increase," and "decrease." However, the vocabulary is quite limited and repetitive ("price," "cost," "metal," "material"). The essay also contains noticeable errors in word formation and spelling, which may cause some difficulty for the reader (e.g., "hold" instead of "held," "rough decrease," "worth" instead of "value," "perspective" instead of "respectively"). These errors hinder clarity and precision in conveying the information.

How to improve:
To achieve a higher band score, the essay should aim to incorporate a wider range of vocabulary more effectively. This includes using more precise terms related to economic trends (e.g., "decline," "fluctuation," "trend," "variation") and specific language related to data interpretation (e.g., "significant drop," "sharp decline," "surpassed," "transformed"). Additionally, attention to accurate word formation and spelling is crucial to enhance clarity and readability. Practicing writing with a focus on varied vocabulary and proofreading for errors would be beneficial for improvement.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates an attempt to use a variety of sentence structures and shows some complex sentence attempts, although these are often inaccurate. There are frequent grammatical errors and issues with punctuation throughout the essay, which can occasionally cause difficulty for the reader in understanding the intended meaning.

How to improve: To improve the score:

Sentence Structures: Focus on using a wider range of sentence structures, including both simple and complex sentences, with greater accuracy.
Grammar and Punctuation: Pay closer attention to grammar rules and punctuation usage to reduce errors.
Clarity and Precision: Ensure that the intended meaning is clear and accurately conveyed, particularly when discussing numerical data and comparisons.

Improving these aspects will enhance the grammatical range and accuracy, potentially raising the band score.

Bài sửa mẫu

The provided graph depicts the average monthly price fluctuations of three distinct solid materials—copper, nickel, and zinc—throughout the year 2014.

Nickel and copper both experienced a decline in prices over the course of the year, whereas zinc followed an opposite trajectory, showing an overall increase. Notably, nickel saw the most significant decrease in price among these metals throughout 2014.

In January, nickel began as the most expensive material, with costs three times higher than copper and six times higher than zinc. Over the next five months, all three materials exhibited a downward trend in their respective values. Zinc and copper experienced decreases of approximately 20% and 25% respectively, with zinc briefly rebounding in February. In stark contrast, nickel plummeted by 90% from its initial price.

Copper emerged as the most valuable material for much of the latter part of the year, witnessing a 10% price increase until the end of August, when zinc and nickel eventually surpassed it. By the conclusion of the year, zinc transitioned from being the least expensive material to the most expensive, followed closely by copper and nickel, resulting in a narrow price differential among these three solid materials.