The line graph shows citizens’ level of satisfaction with healthcare system in 4 nations from 1991 to 2007.

The line graph illustrates citizens’ level of satisfaction with healthcare system in 4 nations from 1991 to 2007.

Overall, while the UK, Netherlands and the USA showed relatively little change throughout, there was a downward trend in the level of satisfaction in Canada. Notably, despite having the highest figure for healthcare system satisfaction at the beginning of the period, Canada could not secure its top position and was overtaken by that of the UK from 1992 onwards. Meanwhile, the lowest satisfaction level was consistently observed in the US during the 16-year period.

Approximately 60% of Canadian satisfied with the healthcare system of their country in 1991, which was the greatest figure recorded on the chart throughout. In the next 7 years, this figure plummeted to around 20%, falling behind the UK and Netherlands and ranked third in 1998. However, it was short-lived, as the figure for Canada rebounded to 40% at the end of the time frame.

The UK, Netherlands and the US displayed roughly similar patterns within this 16-year period. The satisfaction levels of Netherlands and the US were approximately 10% and 22% in 1991 correspondingly, which were followed by a stable uptick towards the end, with their respective figures being 15% and 29%. In comparison, the figure for the UK started at around 49%, before experiencing a slight rise to exactly 50% after 7 years, then returning to its initial point by 2007.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"citizens’ level of satisfaction with healthcare system" -> "citizens’ level of satisfaction with the healthcare system"
Explanation: Adding "the" before "healthcare system" corrects the grammatical error and makes the phrase more precise and formal.
"little change throughout" -> "minimal fluctuations throughout"
Explanation: "Minimal fluctuations" is more precise and academically appropriate than "little change," which is somewhat vague and informal.
"Notably, despite having the highest figure for healthcare system satisfaction at the beginning of the period, Canada could not secure its top position" -> "Notably, despite initially holding the highest level of healthcare satisfaction, Canada failed to maintain its position"
Explanation: "Failed to maintain its position" is more precise and formal than "could not secure its top position," and "initially holding the highest level of healthcare satisfaction" is a clearer and more formal way to express the initial ranking.
"the lowest satisfaction level was consistently observed in the US" -> "the lowest satisfaction level consistently occurred in the US"
Explanation: "Occurred" is more precise and formal than "was observed," fitting better in an academic context.
"Approximately 60%" -> "approximately 60 percent"
Explanation: In academic writing, it is more common to use the numerical form "percent" rather than the abbreviated "percent" to maintain formality.
"the greatest figure recorded on the chart throughout" -> "the highest level recorded throughout the period"
Explanation: "Highest level" is more specific and formal than "greatest figure," and "throughout the period" clarifies the scope of the statement.
"plummeted to around 20%" -> "dropped to approximately 20%"
Explanation: "Dropped" is a more precise verb for describing a decline in levels, and "approximately" is preferred over "around" for academic writing.
"short-lived" -> "transient"
Explanation: "Transient" is a more formal and precise term than "short-lived," which is somewhat colloquial.
"roughly similar patterns" -> "similar patterns"
Explanation: "Roughly" is unnecessary and can be omitted for a more formal tone.
"stable uptick" -> "consistent increase"
Explanation: "Consistent increase" is a more formal and precise term than "stable uptick," which is somewhat colloquial.
"exactly 50%" -> "exactly 50 percent"
Explanation: Consistent use of the numerical form "percent" maintains formality and clarity.
"returning to its initial point" -> "returning to its initial level"
Explanation: "Level" is more specific and appropriate in this context than "point," which is vague and less formal.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6

Explanation: The essay adequately addresses the task by providing an overview of the main trends in the data. It also presents and highlights key features, such as the initial high satisfaction level in Canada and the consistent low satisfaction level in the US. However, some details are irrelevant or inaccurate. For example, the statement that the UK overtook Canada in 1992 is not supported by the data.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by focusing on the most significant trends and providing more accurate information. For example, the essay could state that Canada’s satisfaction level declined steadily from 1991 to 1998, then rebounded slightly in the following years. The essay could also provide more specific details about the changes in satisfaction levels in the UK, Netherlands, and the US.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay presents information in a coherent manner, with a clear overall progression of ideas. The introduction effectively sets the context, and the overall trends are summarized well. However, while cohesive devices are used, there are instances where the cohesion between sentences could be improved, leading to some mechanical flow. Additionally, paragraphing is present but not always logically structured, as some ideas could be better grouped to enhance clarity.
How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on enhancing the logical flow between ideas and ensuring that cohesive devices are used more naturally. Improving paragraph structure by grouping related ideas together and ensuring each paragraph has a clear central topic will also strengthen coherence. Finally, varying the use of cohesive devices and avoiding repetition will contribute to a more sophisticated writing style.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary relevant to the task, allowing for some flexibility and precision in conveying information about the line graph. However, there are attempts to use less common vocabulary that are not always accurate, such as "plummeted" and "rebounded," which may not fully align with the context. Additionally, there are some errors in word formation, such as "Approximately 60% of Canadian satisfied," which should be "Canadians." These issues do not significantly impede communication but do indicate a need for improvement in lexical accuracy and variety.
How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource score, the writer should focus on using a wider range of vocabulary accurately, ensuring that less common lexical items are used correctly in context. Additionally, attention to grammatical structures, such as subject-verb agreement and proper word forms, will help reduce errors and improve overall clarity. Engaging with synonyms and varying expressions to describe trends and changes in data can also contribute to a more sophisticated use of language.

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 performance. While it conveys the main ideas and trends from the line graph, there are several grammatical errors and awkward phrasings that detract from overall clarity. For instance, phrases like "the healthcare system of their country" could be simplified for better flow, and there are instances of missing articles, such as "the" before "healthcare system" in the introduction. Additionally, some sentences contain punctuation errors that may cause minor confusion for the reader. Overall, the communication is effective, but the errors are noticeable and occasionally hinder comprehension.

How to improve:

Enhance Sentence Variety: Use a wider range of complex structures and ensure that they are grammatically accurate. Practice combining clauses and using subordinate clauses effectively.
Proofread for Errors: Take time to review the essay for grammatical and punctuation errors. This can help identify and correct mistakes before submission.
Simplify Phrasing: Aim for clarity by simplifying complex phrases. For example, instead of "the healthcare system of their country," consider "their country’s healthcare system."
Focus on Accuracy: Work on ensuring that all sentences are error-free. This might involve practicing specific grammar rules or seeking feedback from others to identify persistent errors.

Bài sửa mẫu

The line graph illustrates citizens’ levels of satisfaction with the healthcare system in four nations from 1991 to 2007.

Overall, while the UK, Netherlands, and the USA showed relatively little change throughout the period, there was a downward trend in the level of satisfaction in Canada. Notably, despite having the highest figure for healthcare system satisfaction at the beginning of the period, Canada could not maintain its top position and was overtaken by the UK from 1992 onwards. Meanwhile, the lowest satisfaction level was consistently observed in the USA during the 16-year period.

Approximately 60% of Canadians were satisfied with their country’s healthcare system in 1991, which was the highest figure recorded on the chart throughout the period. In the following seven years, this figure plummeted to around 20%, falling behind the UK and Netherlands, and ranked third in 1998. However, this decline was short-lived, as the figure for Canada rebounded to 40% by the end of the time frame.

The UK, Netherlands, and the USA displayed roughly similar patterns during this 16-year period. The satisfaction levels in the Netherlands and the USA were approximately 10% and 22% in 1991, respectively, both of which experienced a stable increase towards the end, with their respective figures reaching 15% and 29%. In comparison, the figure for the UK started at around 49%, before experiencing a slight rise to exactly 50% after seven years, then returning to its initial point by 2007.