The line graph below shows the amounts of waste produced by three companies over a period of 15 years

The chart gives information relating to the amount of waste in three different companies from 2000 to 2015. The figure is measured waste in tones.

Overall, the chart illustrates the number of waste from company A and B that declined considerably throughout the timeframe. Meanwhile the number of waste from company C reached a peak at the end of the period.

Beginning with company A's waste, it started at the top of the chart subsequently decreased steadily to roughly nine tones. At the breaking point, the tones of waste from company B shocked up to reached a peak then fell down significantly over the timeframe to prior pointed the lowest number in 2015.

Moving on to, the data of company C began at the lowest number approximately four tones, it have a increase considerable during fifteen years. Eventually in 2015, it reached the highest peak.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"the amount of waste" -> "the volume of waste"
Explanation: "Volume" is a more precise term in this context, as it specifically refers to the quantity of waste, aligning better with academic language.
"measured waste in tones" -> "measured waste in tonnes"
Explanation: "Tonnes" is the correct spelling in British English, which is typically used in academic contexts. This correction ensures accuracy in terminology.
"the number of waste" -> "the volume of waste"
Explanation: Similar to the first change, "volume" is more accurate than "number" when discussing waste, as it refers to the quantity rather than a countable figure.
"declined considerably" -> "decreased significantly"
Explanation: "Decreased significantly" is a more formal and precise expression, enhancing the academic tone of the essay.
"the tones of waste from company B shocked up to reached a peak" -> "the volume of waste from company B surged to a peak"
Explanation: "Surged" is a more appropriate verb that conveys a rapid increase, and "reached a peak" is redundant when used after "surged." This revision enhances clarity and formality.
"fell down significantly" -> "decreased markedly"
Explanation: "Decreased markedly" is a more formal and precise way to describe a significant reduction, aligning with academic standards.
"the data of company C began at the lowest number approximately four tones" -> "the data for company C began at the lowest volume of approximately four tonnes"
Explanation: "Data for" is more appropriate than "data of," and "volume" is more precise than "number" in this context. The correction to "tonnes" also maintains consistency.
"it have a increase considerable during fifteen years" -> "it experienced a considerable increase over the fifteen-year period"
Explanation: "Experienced" is a more formal verb choice, and "over the fifteen-year period" is clearer and more precise than "during fifteen years."
"it reached the highest peak" -> "it reached its highest volume"
Explanation: "Highest volume" is more precise than "highest peak," which can be ambiguous. This change enhances clarity and maintains an academic tone.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5

Explanation: The essay generally addresses the task, but the format is inappropriate in places. The essay provides a general overview of the trends in waste production for the three companies, but it does not present a clear overview of the main trends. The essay also recounts detail mechanically with no clear overview. For example, the essay states that "the tones of waste from company B shocked up to reached a peak then fell down significantly over the timeframe to prior pointed the lowest number in 2015." This statement is not clear and does not provide a clear overview of the trend in waste production for company B.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clearer overview of the main trends in waste production for the three companies. The essay could also be improved by using more precise language and avoiding unnecessary detail. For example, instead of saying "the tones of waste from company B shocked up to reached a peak then fell down significantly over the timeframe to prior pointed the lowest number in 2015," the essay could say "the amount of waste produced by company B peaked in 2005 and then declined steadily to its lowest point in 2015."

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0

Explanation: The essay presents information with some organization, but it lacks overall progression. While it attempts to describe the trends in waste production for the three companies, the connections between ideas are not always clear, leading to confusion. The use of cohesive devices is inadequate and sometimes inaccurate, such as in phrases like "shocked up to reached a peak," which is not grammatically correct. Additionally, the paragraphing is not effectively utilized, as the transitions between ideas are abrupt and do not guide the reader smoothly through the information.

How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on improving the logical flow of ideas. This can be achieved by using clearer transitional phrases and ensuring that each paragraph has a distinct central topic. Additionally, refining the use of cohesive devices and ensuring they are applied accurately will help create a more fluid reading experience. Finally, organizing the information in a more structured manner, possibly by summarizing key points at the end of each section, would strengthen the overall coherence of the essay.

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 describe the data presented in the chart, the vocabulary used is often repetitive and lacks precision. There are noticeable errors in word choice, such as "shocked up" instead of "shot up," and "tones" instead of "tonnes," which may cause some difficulty for the reader. Additionally, phrases like "the tones of waste from company B shocked up to reached a peak" indicate a lack of control over word formation and syntax. Overall, the lexical resource is basic and does not effectively convey the intended meanings with clarity.

How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource score, the writer should aim to incorporate a wider range of vocabulary, including more specific terms related to waste management and data analysis. Practicing the use of synonyms and varying sentence structures can help avoid repetition. Additionally, focusing on correct word forms and collocations will improve clarity and precision. Reading more academic texts and practicing paraphrasing can also contribute to a more sophisticated use of language.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of grammatical structures, primarily using simple sentences with some attempts at complex structures. While there are some accurate sentences, frequent grammatical errors, such as "the tones of waste from company B shocked up to reached a peak," and "it have a increase considerable," hinder clarity and coherence. These errors can cause difficulty for the reader, which aligns with the characteristics of a Band 5 score.

How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on the following areas:

Expand Sentence Variety: Incorporate a wider range of complex sentence structures to enhance the grammatical range.
Improve Accuracy: Pay attention to subject-verb agreement and verb forms to reduce grammatical errors (e.g., "it has increased considerably" instead of "it have a increase considerable").
Punctuation and Clarity: Use punctuation effectively to separate ideas and improve readability, ensuring that sentences flow logically.
Proofreading: Review the essay for minor errors and awkward phrasing to enhance overall clarity and coherence.

Bài sửa mẫu

The chart provides information regarding the amount of waste produced by three different companies from 2000 to 2015. The figures are measured in tonnes.

Overall, the chart illustrates that the waste produced by companies A and B declined considerably throughout the timeframe, while the waste from company C peaked at the end of the period.

Beginning with company A’s waste, it started at the top of the chart and subsequently decreased steadily to roughly nine tonnes. At the breaking point, the waste from company B surged to reach a peak before falling significantly over the timeframe, ultimately hitting its lowest point in 2015.

Moving on to company C, the data began at the lowest figure of approximately four tonnes, showing a considerable increase over the fifteen years. Eventually, in 2015, it reached its highest peak.