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

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

The graph below illustratest he percentage of four distinct materials that were recycled between 1982 and 2010
Overall, a larger percentage of paper and cardboard were recycled than plastic in every year throughout the study period. Recycling in glass containers also saw an increase in both paper and cardboard recycling rates. Nevertheless, the percentage of cardboard and glass containers varies very little between the years.
On the other hand, between 1982 and 1986, aluminum cans had the lowest rate at the start of the period, at roughly 5%. However, by 2008, this had risen to almost 30%, matching the glass container in terms of level.
In contrast, across the time, recycling for plastic had the lowest proportion. From 1% in 1988 to little less than 10% in 2008. Consequently, by 2008, this percentage had risen to almost 8%.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

1. "illustratest he" -> "illustrates the"
   Explanation: The original phrase contains a typographical error with "illustratest" instead of "illustrates." Correcting this error to "illustrates the" ensures grammatical accuracy.

2. "Recycling in glass containers" -> "Recycling of glass containers"
   Explanation: Using "Recycling of glass containers" instead of "Recycling in glass containers" provides a clearer and more precise description of the action being discussed.

3. "varies very little" -> "varies minimally"
   Explanation: Replacing "varies very little" with "varies minimally" maintains the meaning while using a more sophisticated and concise term.

4. "at the start of the period" -> "initially"
   Explanation: "initially" is a more concise and advanced term compared to "at the start of the period," enhancing the overall clarity and sophistication of the sentence.

5. "little less than" -> "slightly less than"
   Explanation: "slightly less than" is a more precise and formal alternative to "little less than," improving the overall academic tone of the sentence.

6. "across the time" -> "over time"
   Explanation: "over time" is a more idiomatic and sophisticated phrase compared to "across the time," enhancing the overall fluency and professionalism of the writing.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 7

[
Band Score: 7.0
Explanation: The essay covers the requirements of the task by providing an overview of the main trends in recycling rates for paper, cardboard, glass containers, aluminum cans, and plastic from 1982 to 2010. The key features and bullet points are clearly presented and highlighted, showing the differences in recycling rates for each material over the years.
How to improve: To improve, the essay could be more fully extended by providing more specific data points or comparisons between the materials. Additionally, ensuring that the information presented is accurate and relevant to the task would enhance the overall response.
]

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0
Explanation: The essay logically organizes the information by discussing each material’s recycling rate over the years. There is a clear progression from discussing paper and cardboard to glass containers, aluminum cans, and finally plastic. The use of cohesive devices such as "nevertheless," "on the other hand," and "in contrast" helps connect ideas and maintain coherence. Each paragraph focuses on a central topic related to a specific material’s recycling rate.
How to improve: To improve coherence and cohesion, consider using more varied cohesive devices to further connect ideas and enhance the flow of the essay. Additionally, ensure that the paragraphing is consistent and logical throughout the essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a sufficient range of vocabulary with some flexibility and precision. The writer uses less common lexical items with an awareness of style and collocation. There are occasional errors in word choice and word formation, but they do not significantly impede communication.
How to improve: To improve, focus on using more sophisticated and varied vocabulary to enhance the lexical resource. Pay attention to word choice and ensure accuracy in spelling and word formation to minimize errors. Additionally, aim to incorporate more complex sentence structures to further showcase lexical range.

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 not significantly hindered by these errors, but they are noticeable throughout the essay. The essay attempts to use a variety of structures, but there are some inaccuracies that impact the overall clarity and precision of the writing.

How to improve: To improve the score in the Grammatical Range and Accuracy criteria, the writer should focus on using a wider range of complex structures with more accuracy. Paying closer attention to grammar and punctuation errors, and ensuring that the sentences are error-free, will help enhance the overall quality of the writing. Additionally, practicing sentence structure variety and accuracy in writing can help improve the band score in this criterion.

Bài sửa mẫu

The provided graph illustrates the percentage of four distinct materials that were recycled between the years 1982 and 2010 in a particular country.

Overall, paper and cardboard exhibited higher recycling rates compared to plastic throughout the entire study period. The recycling rates for glass containers also experienced an increase, mirroring the trend seen in paper and cardboard recycling. However, the percentages for cardboard and glass containers remained relatively stable over the years.

On the contrary, aluminum cans started with the lowest recycling rate at approximately 5% in the years 1982 to 1986. By 2008, this rate had significantly increased to nearly 30%, aligning with the recycling rate of glass containers.

In contrast, plastic recycling consistently had the lowest proportion, starting at 1% in 1988 and slightly increasing to just under 10% by 2008. Subsequently, by 2008, the recycling rate for plastic had risen to almost 8%.