The graph below shows the percentage of workers from five different European countries that were absent for a day or more due to illness from 1991 to 2001.

The line graph illustrates the proportion of workers with illness absence from five different European nations over a period of 10 years (1991-2001).
Overall, there were significant changes in the percentage of workers who were absent because of illness in all nations over the period shown. In addition, employees in Netherlands absenting for illness were by far higher than employees in other countries.
In 1991, the average illness leave of workers in France was 5%, slightly higher than that number in Netherlands- about 4.8%. Over the following 5 years, the rate of individuals in France and Netherlands taking this leave decreased considerably to roughly 3.3% and 4.3% respectively. However, while that percentage of French workers fell slightly to 3% in 2001, that rate in Netherlands rose again and reached about 5.4%.
Sweden saw the most notable increase in the rate of people take illness leave, about1.6%. From 1991 to 1995, the number of people who were absent due to illness fluctuated around 3%. However, by the beginning of 1996, that data increased significantly and hit a peak at about 4.6% at the end of period shown. Besides, that proportion of UK people and German were insignificant, around 2%. In addition, these nations also experienced a similar slight fluctuation by around 0.3% from 1991 to 2001.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"absenting for illness" -> "on sick leave"
Explanation: "absenting for illness" is an awkward and less common phrase. "On sick leave" is a more natural and widely used term to describe being absent from work due to illness.
"take illness leave" -> "take sick leave"
Explanation: While "take illness leave" is understandable, "take sick leave" is a more commonly used and idiomatic phrase to refer to being absent from work due to illness.
"rate of people take illness leave" -> "rate of people taking sick leave"
Explanation: The original phrase is grammatically incorrect. "Rate of people taking sick leave" is the correct form to describe the percentage of individuals who are on sick leave due to illness.
"that data increased significantly" -> "that figure increased significantly"
Explanation: "Data" refers to raw facts and figures, while "figure" is more appropriate when referring to a specific numerical value or statistic, as in this context.
"proportion of UK people and German were insignificant" -> "proportion of people in the UK and Germany was negligible"
Explanation: The original phrase is unclear and awkward. Using "proportion of people in the UK and Germany was negligible" clarifies that the percentage of individuals on sick leave in these countries was very small.

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 data presented in the graph. It presents information about the percentage of workers absent due to illness in five European countries over a 10-year period. The key features and trends are highlighted, such as the changes in absence rates over time and the comparison between countries. However, some details may be irrelevant or inaccurate, such as the specific percentages mentioned without clear data support.
How to improve: To improve, focus on providing more accurate and relevant details supported by the data in the graph. Ensure that the key features and trends are fully extended and clearly explained without unnecessary information. Additionally, make sure to avoid inaccuracies or irrelevant details that may detract from the overall clarity of the essay.
]

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay arranges information and ideas coherently with a clear overall progression. The introduction provides an overview of the data presented in the graph, and the body paragraphs discuss the changes in illness absence rates in different European countries over the specified time period. The use of transition words and phrases helps to connect ideas within and between sentences. However, there are some instances of faulty cohesion, such as repetitive use of certain phrases like "over the period shown" and "about." The paragraphing is logical, with each paragraph focusing on a specific aspect of the data.

How to improve: To improve coherence and cohesion, try to vary sentence structures and word choices to avoid repetition. Additionally, ensure that the use of cohesive devices is consistent and accurate throughout the essay. Consider using a wider range of linking words and phrases to enhance the flow of ideas. Lastly, pay attention to the logical progression of information within and between paragraphs to strengthen the overall coherence of the essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a sufficient range of vocabulary to allow some flexibility and precision in discussing the data presented in the graph. The writer uses less common lexical items with some awareness of style and collocation, such as "proportion" and "notable increase." There are occasional errors in word choice and word formation, such as "absenting" instead of "absent" and "take illness leave" instead of "take sick leave."

How to improve: To improve the Lexical Resource score, the writer should focus on using more precise and accurate vocabulary throughout the essay. Paying attention to word choice and collocation can help reduce errors and enhance the overall clarity and sophistication of the language used. Additionally, using a wider range of vocabulary, especially in discussing trends and comparisons, can further elevate the lexical quality of the essay.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, with some errors in grammar and punctuation. The overall communication is clear, but there are noticeable errors that may slightly affect the reader’s understanding. The essay attempts to use a variety of structures but lacks full accuracy.

How to improve: To improve the grammatical range and accuracy, focus on using a wider range of complex structures with more accuracy. Pay attention to subject-verb agreement, verb tense consistency, and punctuation. Proofreading the essay for errors and revising complex sentences for clarity can help enhance the overall grammatical accuracy. Additionally, practice using a variety of sentence structures to improve flexibility in writing.

Bài sửa mẫu

The line graph presents the percentage of workers from five distinct European countries who were absent due to illness over a decade from 1991 to 2001.

Overall, there were notable fluctuations in the rates of illness-related absences among workers in all nations during the specified period. Particularly, the absenteeism rate in the Netherlands stood out as the highest compared to the other countries.

In 1991, the percentage of workers on sick leave in France was recorded at 5%, slightly surpassing the figure for the Netherlands, which was approximately 4.8%. Over the subsequent five years, both France and the Netherlands witnessed a significant decline in illness-related absences, dropping to around 3.3% and 4.3% respectively. However, while the rate of sick leave among French workers decreased slightly to 3% by 2001, the Netherlands experienced a resurgence, peaking at about 5.4%.

Sweden exhibited the most substantial increase in illness-related absenteeism, rising by 1.6%. Between 1991 and 1995, the percentage of workers on sick leave in Sweden fluctuated around 3%. However, by early 1996, there was a notable surge, reaching a peak of about 4.6% by the end of the period. Conversely, the rates of sick leave in the UK and Germany remained relatively low, hovering around 2%. These nations also experienced minor fluctuations of approximately 0.3% from 1991 to 2001.