The graph below shows the average time spent by four car manufacturers to produce vehicles at their US factories.

The line graph illustrates the standard time for producing motor vehicles of four corporations in the US from 1998 to 2005.
It is notable that all of those manufacturers made considerable achievements in reducing lead time. Additionally, Honda predominated with the lowest manufacturing time for most of the period.
In 1998, General Motor allocated the greatest amount of time to produce cars with typically 32 hours, approximately one point two the figure for Ford. Meanwhile, Toyota vehicles were produced in only 22 hours and showed no disparity compared to Honda.
During the first four years, the proportion of automotive companies below followed various patterns. Particularly, General Motor shortened production time to nearly 27 hours, down roughly 15%. The figure for this company was surpassed by that of Ford when Ford experienced a significant increase to reach a peak of 31 hours in 2001. On the contrary, the average hours of two Asian manufacturers fluctuated between 20 and 23 hours and attained about 22 hours in 2001, remaining relatively unchanged compared to 1998.
From the year 2001 onwards, the proportion of Toyota and Honda rose by 2 hours in 2002, followed by a considerable drop to just over 20 hours in 2012. On the other hand, the lead time of General Motor fell to 24 hours, while the figure for Ford decreased by 25% and hit a low point at below 24 hours in the last year.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"standard time" -> "production time"
Explanation: "Production time" is a more precise term to describe the time taken to manufacture motor vehicles.
"considerable achievements" -> "significant progress"
Explanation: "Significant progress" conveys a stronger sense of advancement and is more formal than "considerable achievements."
"predominated" -> "dominated"
Explanation: "Dominated" is a more direct and active verb choice, enhancing clarity and conciseness.
"allocated" -> "required"
Explanation: "Required" better conveys the sense that time is a necessity rather than something deliberately assigned, improving accuracy in describing the manufacturing process.
"approximately one point two the figure" -> "approximately 1.2 times the figure"
Explanation: Using "times" instead of "point" and specifying "1.2" enhances clarity and precision in expressing the ratio.
"disparity" -> "difference"
Explanation: "Difference" is a simpler and clearer term than "disparity" in this context, improving readability.
"below followed various patterns" -> "exhibited various patterns"
Explanation: "Exhibited" is a more formal and precise verb choice that fits better in an academic context.
"the proportion of automotive companies below" -> "the production times of automotive companies"
Explanation: "Production times" more accurately describes what is being compared and avoids ambiguity.
"hours of two Asian manufacturers" -> "production times of the two Asian manufacturers"
Explanation: Adding "production times of" clarifies the context and improves precision.
"rose by 2 hours" -> "increased by 2 hours"
Explanation: "Increased by" is a clearer and more formal expression than "rose by."
"hit a low point at below 24 hours" -> "reached a low point of under 24 hours"
Explanation: "Reached a low point of under" is a clearer and more precise expression than "hit a low point at below."

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

[
Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay adequately addresses the requirements of the task by providing an overview of the data presented in the graph. It identifies key trends and compares the manufacturing times of four car manufacturers over the specified period. The overview is clear and the key features are highlighted, such as the fluctuations in production time among the companies over time.
How to improve: To improve, the essay could provide more precise details and ensure accuracy in reporting the data. Additionally, the response could be more fully developed by extending the analysis of trends and providing more context where necessary.
]

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0

Explanation:
The essay logically organizes information and ideas, with clear progression throughout the text. The introduction provides an overview of the graph and the main trends observed. Each paragraph focuses on a specific aspect of the data, such as comparing different manufacturers’ production times or discussing changes over time. There is coherence within and between sentences, with appropriate use of cohesive devices to connect ideas. The essay also utilizes paragraphing effectively, presenting a clear central topic within each paragraph.

How to improve:
To further enhance coherence and cohesion, ensure that cohesive devices are used consistently and effectively throughout the essay. Additionally, consider refining the transitions between paragraphs to create smoother connections between ideas. Pay close attention to referencing and substitution to avoid any potential repetition or ambiguity in the text. Overall, maintaining a clear and logical structure while reinforcing coherence and cohesion will help strengthen the essay’s effectiveness.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a sufficient range of vocabulary, with attempts to use less common vocabulary (e.g., "predominated," "disparity," "allocated," "proportion"). There is some awareness of style and collocation, evidenced by phrases like "manufacturers made considerable achievements," and "experienced a significant increase." Occasional errors in word choice and collocation are present (e.g., "allocated the greatest amount of time" could be improved to "took the longest time"), but they do not significantly impede understanding. Overall, the essay effectively conveys the information presented in the graph with clarity and coherence.

How to improve:
To improve lexical resource and aim for a higher band score, focus on enhancing the variety and precision of vocabulary usage. Utilize more sophisticated vocabulary where appropriate and ensure that word choice and collocation are consistently accurate. Additionally, pay attention to idiomatic expressions and phrasing to enhance the overall fluency and sophistication of the essay.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a good range of sentence structures, including complex ones, such as the use of subordinate clauses and varied sentence lengths. There is evidence of control over grammar and punctuation, with most sentences being error-free. However, there are a few minor errors and instances where clarity could be improved. For example, "one point two the figure for Ford" could be clarified to "1.2 times the figure for Ford."

How to improve:
To enhance the grammatical accuracy further, the writer should pay closer attention to clarity and precision in expression. Additionally, proofreading for minor errors and awkward phrasings would help to polish the essay.

Bài sửa mẫu

The line graph delineates the standard duration required for manufacturing motor vehicles by four corporations in the US spanning from 1998 to 2005. Overall, substantial reductions in production time were achieved by all manufacturers during this period, with Honda consistently leading in efficiency.

In 1998, General Motors devoted the most time to car production, averaging around 32 hours, which was approximately 1.2 times the duration for Ford. In contrast, Toyota manufactured vehicles in merely 22 hours, exhibiting parity with Honda.

Over the initial four years, the production timelines of these automotive giants followed diverse trajectories. Notably, General Motors streamlined its production process, reducing the time to nearly 27 hours, marking a decline of approximately 15%. Conversely, Ford experienced a notable increase, peaking at 31 hours in 2001. Meanwhile, the average production duration for Toyota and Honda fluctuated between 20 and 23 hours, remaining relatively consistent compared to 1998.

From 2001 onward, both Toyota and Honda witnessed an increase of 2 hours in 2002, followed by a substantial decrease to just over 20 hours in 2005. In contrast, General Motors’ production time decreased to 24 hours, while Ford experienced a 25% reduction, reaching a minimum of less than 24 hours in the final year.