The graph below shows the production levels of the main kinds of fuel in the UK between 1981 and 2000. Summarize the formation by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. You should write at least 150 words.

The graph below shows the production levels of the main kinds of fuel in the UK between 1981 and 2000.

Summarize the formation by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.

You should write at least 150 words.

MNGOK:
The given line graph shows how many energy units that three primary fuels were made in the UK from 1981 to 2000. Overall, what stands out from the chart is that all types of fuels registered an upward trend in the production levels except for coal whose figure took the opposite direction. Among these fuels, petroleum remained the highest figure during the entire period.
In the year 1981, by far the proportion of petroleum was nearly 100 energy units, making it the most common option. The second place belonged to coal, with about 80 units and double the number of natural gas.
Thereafter, petroleum generation witnessed a dramatic rise to 140 units and remained the constant number in 1986. Afterward, its data considerably dropped by 40 units in the next 5 years and recovered to reach a peak of over 140 units in 2000, still ranking first. Similarly, there was a level off at roughly 40 units in producing natural gas before growing significantly by 60 units in the final year. In contrast, since 1981 a sharp downward trend can be seen in the statistics to manufacture coal as 40 units were revealed, after which this figure increased again to 60 until 1986 but later modestly falling to under the figure at the start of the period.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"MNGOK:" -> "Introduction:"
Explanation: "MNGOK:" appears to be an abbreviation without context. Replacing it with "Introduction:" clarifies the purpose of the section and aligns with academic conventions.
"how many energy units that three primary fuels were made" -> "the number of energy units produced from three primary fuels"
Explanation: "how many energy units that" is grammatically incorrect and awkward. "the number of energy units produced from" is grammatically correct and more precise.
"what stands out from the chart is" -> "it is evident from the chart that"
Explanation: "what stands out from" is somewhat informal and vague. "it is evident from" is more formal and precise.
"except for coal whose figure took the opposite direction" -> "except for coal, whose production decreased"
Explanation: "took the opposite direction" is metaphorical and less precise. "whose production decreased" is straightforward and academically appropriate.
"petroleum remained the highest figure" -> "petroleum remained the highest level"
Explanation: "figure" is incorrectly used here, as it typically refers to a graphical representation. "level" is the correct term for describing quantities.
"by far the proportion of petroleum was nearly 100 energy units" -> "petroleum accounted for nearly 100 energy units"
Explanation: "by far the proportion of" is awkward and unclear. "accounted for" is more direct and appropriate for academic writing.
"making it the most common option" -> "making it the dominant choice"
Explanation: "most common option" is somewhat informal and vague. "dominant choice" is more precise and formal.
"witnessed a dramatic rise" -> "experienced a significant increase"
Explanation: "witnessed a dramatic rise" is somewhat informal and emotional. "experienced a significant increase" is more neutral and suitable for academic contexts.
"its data considerably dropped by 40 units" -> "its production decreased by 40 units"
Explanation: "its data" is ambiguous; "its production" clearly refers to the production of petroleum.
"a level off" -> "a plateau"
Explanation: "a level off" is not a standard term. "a plateau" is the correct term for describing a period of stability in data.
"growing significantly by 60 units" -> "increasing by 60 units"
Explanation: "growing significantly" is redundant. "increasing" is sufficient and maintains formality.
"a sharp downward trend can be seen" -> "a significant decline is evident"
Explanation: "a sharp downward trend can be seen" is verbose and informal. "a significant decline is evident" is concise and formal.
"modestly falling to under the figure at the start of the period" -> "modestly decreasing to levels below those at the start of the period"
Explanation: "modestly falling to under the figure" is awkward and unclear. "modestly decreasing to levels below those at the start of the period" is clearer and more formal.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay provides an overview of the main trends in the graph, but it does not fully satisfy all the requirements of the task. The essay does not present a clear overview of the main trends, differences or stages. It also does not adequately highlight key features/bullet points. For example, the essay states that "petroleum remained the highest figure during the entire period," but it does not provide any specific data to support this claim. The essay also does not make comparisons where relevant. For example, the essay states that "natural gas grew significantly by 60 units in the final year," but it does not compare this growth to the growth of other fuels.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clearer overview of the main trends, differences or stages. The essay could also be improved by highlighting key features/bullet points more effectively. For example, the essay could state that "petroleum remained the highest figure during the entire period, with a peak of over 140 units in 2000." The essay could also be improved by making comparisons where relevant. For example, the essay could state that "natural gas grew significantly by 60 units in the final year, while coal production fell to under the figure at the start of the period."

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0
Explanation: The essay presents information with some organization, but there is a lack of overall progression. While it attempts to describe trends in fuel production, the connections between ideas are not always clear, leading to some confusion. The use of cohesive devices is inadequate, and there are instances of repetition without effective referencing or substitution. Additionally, the paragraphing is not always logical, which detracts from the overall coherence of the essay.
How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on improving the logical flow of ideas by clearly linking sentences and using a wider range of cohesive devices. Ensuring that each paragraph has a clear central topic and that the information is sequenced logically will help. Additionally, revising the use of referencing and substitution can reduce repetition and improve clarity. Finally, organizing the essay into distinct paragraphs that each address a specific aspect of the data will aid in overall coherence.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary relevant to the task, with some attempts to use less common terms. However, there are noticeable inaccuracies in word choice and collocation, such as "the highest figure" instead of "the highest production level" and "the constant number" instead of "a constant level." There are also some errors in spelling and word formation, such as "MNGOK" at the beginning, which appears to be a typographical error. While these errors do not completely impede communication, they do detract from the overall clarity and precision of the essay.

How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource score, the writer should focus on using a wider range of vocabulary with greater precision. This includes selecting more appropriate terms and phrases that accurately convey the intended meaning. Additionally, practicing the correct formation of words and ensuring spelling accuracy will help improve the overall quality of the writing. Incorporating more sophisticated vocabulary and avoiding repetition will also contribute to a higher band score.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, which is characteristic of a Band 6. While there are some effective complex structures, the essay contains several grammatical errors and awkward phrasing that occasionally hinder clarity. For example, phrases like "the highest figure during the entire period" and "the second place belonged to coal" could be better expressed. Additionally, there are issues with punctuation and sentence structure that detract from overall accuracy. However, the errors do not significantly impede communication, allowing the reader to understand the main ideas presented.
How to improve: To enhance the grammatical range and accuracy, the writer should focus on the following areas:

Variety in Sentence Structures: Incorporate more complex sentences and ensure they are grammatically correct.
Error Correction: Review the essay for grammatical errors and awkward phrases, aiming for clearer expression.
Punctuation: Pay attention to punctuation rules to improve readability and clarity.
Practice: Regularly practice writing essays and seek feedback to identify and correct recurring mistakes.

Bài sửa mẫu

The given line graph shows the production levels of three primary fuels in the UK from 1981 to 2000. Overall, what stands out from the chart is that all types of fuels registered an upward trend in production levels, except for coal, which took the opposite direction. Among these fuels, petroleum consistently had the highest production levels throughout the entire period.

In 1981, the production of petroleum was nearly 100 energy units, making it the most common fuel. The second place belonged to coal, with about 80 units, which was double the amount of natural gas.

Thereafter, petroleum production witnessed a dramatic rise to 140 units and remained constant at this level in 1986. Afterward, its production considerably dropped by 40 units over the next five years, before recovering to reach a peak of over 140 units in 2000, still ranking first. Similarly, natural gas production leveled off at roughly 40 units before growing significantly by 60 units in the final year. In contrast, a sharp downward trend can be seen in coal production, which started at 40 units in 1981. This figure increased to 60 units by 1986 but then modestly fell to below the initial level by the end of the period.