the graph below shows yearly savings of two employees in a superstore from 2011 to 2017

The graph illustrates the saving moneys for 1 year of two people working in the superstore between 2011 and 2017

Overall the yearly savings of Jennie was increase but Russell decrease.addictionally the savings of Jennie have a bigger changes than Russell in the time frame

In further detail began with the amounts that increased was jennie it stood at 1,500 in 2011 which in the lower amounts then increased to 2,000 in 2013 and surpassing Russell in that year before jumped to 4,000 in the last time frame

Moving to the savings of Russell it began at 4,000 in the first period time then decreased to 2,000 in 2013 and get surpassed by Jennie after that it significantly increased to about 3,000 in the last time frame

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"the saving moneys" -> "the savings"
Explanation: "Saving moneys" is an awkward and incorrect phrase. "Savings" is the correct term to refer to accumulated money, making it more concise and appropriate.
"was increase" -> "increased"
Explanation: The phrase "was increase" is grammatically incorrect. "Increased" is the correct past tense form of the verb, ensuring proper grammatical structure.
"but Russell decrease" -> "but Russell decreased."
Explanation: "Decrease" is incorrectly used here; it should be in the past tense "decreased" to maintain consistency with the previous verb tense.
"addictionally" -> "additionally"
Explanation: "Addictionally" is a misspelling. The correct term "additionally" is necessary for clarity and correctness.
"have a bigger changes" -> "has greater changes"
Explanation: "Have" should be "has" to agree with the singular subject "savings." Additionally, "greater" is a more precise comparative term than "bigger" in an academic context.
"in the time frame" -> "within the time frame"
Explanation: "Within" is more precise and formal than "in," enhancing the academic tone of the writing.
"the amounts that increased was jennie" -> "the amounts that increased were those of Jennie"
Explanation: The verb "was" should be "were" to agree with the plural subject "amounts." Additionally, specifying "those of Jennie" clarifies the subject.
"which in the lower amounts then increased" -> "which were lower and then increased"
Explanation: "In the lower amounts" is awkward; "which were lower" improves clarity and grammatical structure.
"before jumped to 4,000 in the last time frame" -> "before jumping to 4,000 in the final time frame."
Explanation: "Jumped" should be in the gerund form "jumping" to maintain parallel structure. "Final" is a more precise term than "last" in this context.
"it began at 4,000 in the first period time" -> "it began at 4,000 in the initial time period."
Explanation: "First period time" is awkward; "initial time period" is clearer and more formal.
"then decreased to 2,000 in 2013 and get surpassed by Jennie" -> "then decreased to 2,000 in 2013 and was surpassed by Jennie."
Explanation: "Get" is informal and incorrect; "was" is the appropriate past tense form, maintaining the academic tone.
"after that it significantly increased to about 3,000 in the last time frame" -> "subsequently, it significantly increased to approximately 3,000 in the final time frame."
Explanation: "After that" is informal; "subsequently" is more formal and precise. "About" should be replaced with "approximately" for academic rigor.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 4

Band Score: 4

Explanation: The essay attempts to address the task but does not cover all key features/bullet points. The essay does not provide a clear overview of the main trends in the graph. The essay also confuses key features/bullet points with detail. For example, the essay states that "the savings of Jennie have a bigger changes than Russell in the time frame" but does not provide any specific data to support this claim.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clear overview of the main trends in the graph. The essay should also focus on presenting the key features/bullet points of the graph, rather than providing irrelevant details. The essay should also use more precise language to describe the data. For example, instead of saying "the savings of Jennie have a bigger changes than Russell in the time frame", the essay could say "Jennie’s savings increased more significantly than Russell’s savings over the period shown".

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 discuss the savings of both employees, the ideas are not clearly linked, and the transitions between sentences and paragraphs are often abrupt. The use of cohesive devices is inadequate and at times inaccurate, leading to confusion. Additionally, there are issues with paragraphing, as the essay does not clearly separate the different sections of information, making it harder for the reader to follow the argument.

How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on clearly organizing the information with logical progression. This can be achieved by using more varied and appropriate cohesive devices to connect ideas smoothly. Additionally, ensuring that each paragraph has a distinct central topic and that the information flows logically from one point to the next would improve clarity. Finally, revising the overall structure to include clear introductory and concluding statements would help in presenting a more cohesive argument.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of vocabulary that is minimally adequate for the task. While it attempts to convey the main ideas regarding the savings of Jennie and Russell, the vocabulary used is basic and repetitive, such as "increase," "decrease," and "savings." There are noticeable errors in word choice and sentence structure, which may cause some difficulty for the reader. For instance, phrases like "the saving moneys" and "the amounts that increased was jennie" are awkward and grammatically incorrect. Additionally, spelling errors such as "addictionally" and "jennie" (which should be capitalized) detract from the overall clarity of the essay.

How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource score, the writer should aim to use a wider variety of vocabulary, including synonyms and more precise terms related to financial savings. Improving grammatical accuracy and sentence structure will also help convey ideas more clearly. Furthermore, avoiding repetitive language and incorporating less common lexical items would elevate the essay’s quality. Lastly, careful proofreading to eliminate spelling errors would contribute positively to the overall impression.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 4

Band Score: 4.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a very limited range of grammatical structures, primarily relying on simple sentence forms. While there are attempts to use more complex structures, these attempts are often inaccurate, leading to frequent grammatical errors that hinder clarity. For instance, phrases like "the saving moneys for 1 year" and "the amounts that increased was jennie" contain errors that disrupt understanding. Additionally, punctuation is often faulty, as seen in the lack of proper spacing and capitalization. Overall, the errors predominate, making it difficult for the reader to follow the argument clearly.

How to improve: To improve the score, the writer should focus on expanding their range of grammatical structures by incorporating more complex sentences and ensuring accuracy in their usage. Practicing sentence variety, including the use of subordinate clauses and correct punctuation, will enhance clarity. Additionally, proofreading for grammatical errors and ensuring proper subject-verb agreement will help in producing more error-free sentences. Engaging with model essays and grammar exercises could further aid in developing a stronger command of English grammar.

Bài sửa mẫu

The graph illustrates the yearly savings of two employees working in a superstore from 2011 to 2017.

Overall, Jennie’s yearly savings increased, while Russell’s savings decreased. Additionally, Jennie’s savings exhibited more significant changes than Russell’s during the time frame.

In further detail, Jennie’s savings started at $1,500 in 2011, which was the lower amount, then rose to $2,000 in 2013, surpassing Russell’s savings in that year. Her savings then jumped to $4,000 by the end of the period.

In contrast, Russell’s savings began at $4,000 in the initial year, then decreased to $2,000 in 2013, allowing Jennie to surpass him. After that, his savings significantly increased to about $3,000 by the end of the time frame.