The graph below shows the proportion of four different materials that were recycled from 1982 to 2010 in a particular country. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The graph below shows the proportion of four different materials that were recycled from 1982 to 2010 in a particular country.

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The line graph indicates the recycling rate of four specific materials in one country over a 28-year period from 1982.
As can be seen from the graph, paper and cardboard consistently remained the highest rate despite experiencing a downward trend. Notably, the figures for glass containers and aluminum cars demonstrated significant growth, while the recycling rate of plastic leveled off over the period given.
In 1982, the figure for paper and cardboard started the period at 65%, after which it saw a fluctuation between 65% and 70% before escalating to 80% in 1994. Meanwhile, 50% of glass containers were reprocessed in 1982, then it declined considerably to 40% in 1990. From the year 1994 onwards, the proportion of paper and cardboard fell down steeply and ended the period at 70%. In contrast, the percentage of glass remarkably soar to the peak of 60% in 2010, finishing at 2nd place.
In addition, the initial rate of aluminum cans began at around 2% in 1986. Since then, it demonstrated an upsurge to approximately 45% in 2010, allocating the 3rd rank. The level of plastic that was recycled remained stable at below 10%, constituting the lowest category during the entire period.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

1. "Notably, the figures for glass containers and aluminum cars demonstrated significant growth" -> "Notably, the figures for glass containers and aluminum cans exhibited significant growth."
   Explanation: Using "cans" instead of "cars" is more accurate and appropriate in the context of recycling materials. "Exhibited" adds sophistication to the language compared to "demonstrated."

2. "the recycling rate of plastic leveled off over the period given" -> "the recycling rate of plastic plateaued over the given period."
   Explanation: "Leveled off" is a common phrase, but "plateaued" is more precise and sophisticated in describing a stabilization in the recycling rate.

3. "meanwhile" -> "conversely"
   Explanation: "Conversely" indicates a stronger contrast between the previous point and the one being made, enhancing the clarity and coherence of the sentence.

4. "remarkably soar" -> "markedly soared"
   Explanation: "Remarkably soar" is awkward phrasing; "markedly soared" is more concise and grammatically correct.

5. "upsurge" -> "surge"
   Explanation: "Surge" is sufficient to convey the idea of a sudden increase without the need for "upsurge," which is redundant.

6. "allocating the 3rd rank" -> "earning the 3rd position"
   Explanation: "Earning the 3rd position" is more precise and formal than "allocating the 3rd rank."

7. "level of plastic that was recycled" -> "recycling level of plastic"
   Explanation: Reversing the order to "recycling level of plastic" flows better and is more commonly used in discussing recycling rates.

8. "constituting the lowest category during the entire period" -> "making it the lowest category throughout the entire period"
   Explanation: The suggested improvement provides a clearer and more concise expression of the idea.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0

Explanation:
The essay adequately covers the requirements of the task by providing a clear overview of the main trends in recycling rates for paper, glass, aluminum, and plastic over the given period. It presents and highlights key features, such as the consistent high rate of paper and cardboard recycling, the significant growth in glass and aluminum recycling, and the stable rate of plastic recycling. However, the extension of some points could be further developed to enhance clarity and detail, particularly regarding the fluctuations in recycling rates over time.

How to improve:
To improve, consider elaborating more on the reasons behind the fluctuations in recycling rates and providing additional contextual information where necessary. Ensure that each key point is fully developed and supported with relevant data from the graph.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7

Explanation: The essay logically organizes the information, with clear progression throughout. Each paragraph presents a central topic: the first discusses the overall trend, the second focuses on paper and cardboard, the third on glass containers, and the fourth on aluminum cans and plastic. The use of cohesive devices is appropriate, with transitions like "meanwhile," "in contrast," and "in addition" aiding coherence. Paragraphing is sufficient and appropriate, with each paragraph clearly delineating a specific aspect of the data.

How to improve: To enhance cohesion further, ensure that cohesive devices are used consistently throughout the essay. Additionally, consider refining referencing and substitution to avoid potential repetitiveness or lack of clarity.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0
Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a sufficient range of vocabulary, allowing for flexibility and precision in conveying information. There is consistent use of vocabulary related to describing trends and proportions, such as "recycling rate," "proportion," "demonstrated significant growth," and "remarkably soar." The writer also employs less common lexical items like "reprocessed," "escalating," and "fluctuation," showing some awareness of style and collocation. Occasional errors in word choice and word formation are present, such as "upsurge" instead of "increase" and "soar" instead of "soared," but they do not significantly impede communication. Spelling and word formation errors are minimal, with only a few instances like "2nd" instead of "second" and "below 10%" instead of "below ten percent."
How to improve:
To improve, the writer should pay closer attention to word choice and ensure consistency in verb tenses. Additionally, refining the use of less common vocabulary items and avoiding minor errors in word formation would enhance lexical precision. Finally, maintaining consistency in numerical expressions (e.g., "2%" vs. "below 10%") would contribute to clearer communication.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a variety of sentence structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. There is effective use of transitional phrases and clauses to connect ideas. The majority of sentences are error-free, showcasing good control of grammar and punctuation. However, there are a few instances of minor errors such as inaccurate verb tenses ("soar" instead of "soared") and inconsistencies in verb agreement ("glass remarkably soar" should be "glass remarkably soared"). Overall, the essay effectively communicates the main features of the graph with clarity and coherence.

How to improve: To enhance grammatical accuracy, carefully proofread the essay to correct minor errors in verb tense and subject-verb agreement. Additionally, strive for more consistency in verb tense usage throughout the essay.

Bài sửa mẫu

Certainly! Here’s an improved version of the IELTS Task 1 report:

The line graph illustrates the recycling rates of four specific materials in a particular country over a 28-year period from 1982.

Overall, paper and cardboard maintained the highest recycling rate throughout the period, although it showed a decline after peaking in 1994. In contrast, glass containers and aluminum cans saw significant increases, while the recycling rate of plastic remained relatively stable and low.

In 1982, the recycling rate of paper and cardboard began at 65%, fluctuating between 65% and 70% until it reached 80% in 1994. Afterward, it experienced a steep decline, ending at 70% in 2010. Conversely, glass containers started at 50% in 1982, declined to 40% in 1990, and then rose sharply to 60% in 2010, securing the second highest position.

The recycling rate of aluminum cans began at approximately 2% in 1982, gradually increasing to around 45% by 2010, placing it third. Plastic recycling, however, remained consistently below 10% throughout the entire period, making it the lowest category.

This improved version maintains the original data and structure while enhancing clarity and readability, as required in the IELTS Writing Task 1 assessment.