The graph below shows the percentage of GDP government spending on health, education, and road & railways from 2000 to 2025 in a particular country. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The line graph provides information about the proportion of GDF invested in health, education and road & railways between 2000 and 2025.

Overall, the figures for education and road & railroad experienced a downward trend, and the opposite was true for health.

In terms of education and road & railways, the percentage of GDF both underwent growth over 25 years. Starting at over 4.0% in 2000, the statistics for road & railways hit a low of 3.5% in 2005 and reached the highest peak at nearly 5.0% in the next decade. Thereafter, the figure dropped to over 4.0% in 2020 and is anticipated to decrease moderately in the next 5 years. Meanwhile, during the first 10-year period, the proportion allocated to education went up from over 5.0% to 7.0% before sinking significantly in the next 25 years.

In contrast, there was a continuous increase in the percentage of GDF invested in health during the given time. Accounting for over 4.0%, which is nearly the same as the figure for road & railroad in 2000, the statistics climbed up considerably to approximately 6.5% in 2020 and is projected to see an upward trajectory by 2025.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"The line graph provides information" -> "The line graph illustrates"
Explanation: "Illustrates" is more precise and academically appropriate than "provides information," as it specifically conveys the act of presenting data in a visual format.
"proportion of GDF" -> "percentage of the Gross Domestic Fund"
Explanation: Adding "the Gross Domestic Fund" clarifies the term "GDF," which is likely an abbreviation that may be unfamiliar to some readers.
"the opposite was true for health" -> "the trend was reversed for health"
Explanation: "The trend was reversed" is a more precise and formal way to describe a change in direction, avoiding the colloquial tone of "the opposite was true."
"the percentage of GDF both underwent growth" -> "the percentages of GDF both increased"
Explanation: "Increased" is a more direct and formal term than "underwent growth," which can sound vague and less specific in an academic context.
"hit a low of" -> "reached a low of"
Explanation: "Reached a low of" is a more formal and precise expression than "hit a low of," which is somewhat informal and colloquial.
"the highest peak" -> "the peak"
Explanation: "The peak" is sufficient and more concise without the redundant "highest."
"is anticipated to decrease moderately" -> "is projected to decrease gradually"
Explanation: "Projected" is more specific and formal than "anticipated," and "gradually" is a more precise term than "moderately" in this context.
"sinking significantly" -> "dropping significantly"
Explanation: "Dropping" is a more precise and formal term than "sinking," which can imply a more dramatic or negative change.
"Accounting for over 4.0%" -> "amounting to over 4.0%"
Explanation: "Amounting to" is more formal and precise than "accounting for," which is typically used in financial contexts.
"climbed up considerably" -> "increased substantially"
Explanation: "Increased substantially" is more formal and avoids the colloquial "climbed up," which is less suitable for academic writing.
"see an upward trajectory" -> "continue to rise"
Explanation: "Continue to rise" is a more straightforward and formal way to describe ongoing upward movement, avoiding the slightly informal "see an upward trajectory."

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7

Explanation: The essay provides a clear overview of the main trends in the graph, highlighting the upward trend in health spending and the downward trends in education and road & railway spending. The essay also presents key features of the data, such as the peak in road & railway spending in 2010 and the significant drop in education spending after 2010.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing more specific details about the trends and key features. For example, the essay could state that health spending increased by approximately 2.5% between 2000 and 2025, while education spending decreased by approximately 2% over the same period. The essay could also provide more specific information about the peak in road & railway spending, such as the exact year and percentage.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a logical organisation of information and ideas, providing clear progression throughout. Each paragraph focuses on a specific aspect (education, road & railways, health) with a central topic maintained. The sequencing of information is clear, with a structured approach to describing trends over time.

The use of cohesive devices is generally appropriate, aiding in the coherence of the essay. There is effective use of linking words and phrases ("Overall", "In terms of", "Meanwhile", "In contrast") that guide the reader through the comparisons and contrasts between the categories. However, there are minor instances where the use of cohesive devices could be more varied or refined ("the opposite was true for health" could be more explicitly connected to the previous sentence).

Paragraphing is sufficient and generally appropriate, although there could be minor improvements in ensuring absolute clarity in the logical flow between paragraphs.

How to improve:
To enhance coherence and cohesion to potentially achieve a higher band score:

Ensure that all cohesive devices used are fully integrated to provide seamless transitions between ideas.
Aim for even more precise and varied use of cohesive devices to further clarify relationships between sentences and ideas.
Review paragraphing to ensure that each paragraph maintains a clear central theme and logical progression, potentially refining transitions between paragraphs for enhanced clarity.

Overall, the essay effectively meets the criteria for Band 7 due to its clear organisation, logical progression of ideas, and mostly appropriate use of cohesive devices.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary appropriate for the task. It effectively describes trends and makes comparisons using a variety of vocabulary related to economic indicators and trends (e.g., "proportion," "underwent growth," "hit a low," "allocated," "sinking significantly," "continuous increase," "climbed up considerably," "upward trajectory"). However, there are some instances where vocabulary could be more varied or more precise ("hit a low," "sinking significantly").

There are also a few inaccuracies and errors in word choice ("GDF" instead of "GDP," "upward trajectory by 2025" could be more precise). Spelling and word formation are generally accurate and do not impede communication.

How to improve:
To improve to a higher band score, aim to use a wider range of vocabulary with more precision and sophistication. Pay attention to accuracy in word choice and ensure consistency in terminology (e.g., using "GDP" consistently instead of "GDF"). Work on avoiding repetitive or imprecise expressions ("hit a low," "sinking significantly") by exploring more varied vocabulary choices.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, contributing to a somewhat varied grammatical range. There are instances of accurate complex sentences, such as "During the first 10-year period, the proportion allocated to education went up from over 5.0% to 7.0% before sinking significantly in the next 25 years." However, there are also errors present that occasionally affect clarity and precision. For example, "the opposite was true for health" could benefit from clearer phrasing for grammatical accuracy.

There are several instances of grammatical errors and inaccuracies throughout the essay. For instance, "the figures for education and road & railroad experienced a downward trend" lacks parallel structure, and "the statistics for road & railways hit a low of 3.5% in 2005 and reached the highest peak at nearly 5.0% in the next decade" contains errors in subject-verb agreement and phrasing. These errors occasionally hinder the communication of ideas but do not completely obscure meaning.

How to improve:
To improve the score, focus on enhancing the accuracy and complexity of sentence structures while minimizing errors. Pay attention to subject-verb agreement, sentence clarity, and parallel structure in comparisons. Additionally, ensure that transitions between sentences and ideas are clear and logical to improve overall coherence.

Bài sửa mẫu

The line graph illustrates the allocation of GDP towards health, education, and road & railways in a specific country from 2000 to 2025.

Between 2000 and 2025, the proportion of GDP spent on education and road & railways showed a declining trend, while investment in health witnessed a consistent increase.

Regarding education and road & railways, the percentage of GDP allocated to these sectors experienced growth over the 25-year period. Starting above 4.0% in 2000, spending on road & railways dipped to 3.5% in 2005 before peaking at nearly 5.0% in the following decade. Subsequently, it decreased to over 4.0% by 2020 and is expected to moderately decline in the next 5 years. Similarly, spending on education rose from over 5.0% to 7.0% in the first decade but decreased significantly over the subsequent 25 years.

In contrast, investment in health consistently increased throughout the period. Beginning at just over 4.0% in 2000, it rose sharply to approximately 6.5% by 2020 and is projected to continue on an upward trajectory by 2025.