THE PIE CHART BELOW SHOW THE DEVICES PEOPLE IN THE 18 TO 25 AGE GROUP USE TO WATCH TELEVISION IN CANADA IN 2 DIFFERENT YEARS

The two pie charts illustrate the devices used by people aged 18-25 to watch television in Canada from 2009 to 2019.
Overall, it is clear that the percentage for the number of people watched of mobile phones, flat-screen TV and tablets increased, while the proportion of laptops, desktop computers, and conventional TV to decreased. In addition, conventional TV data with the most fluctuation dropped with 30% between 2009 and 2019.
Looking at the graph more closely, can see that at over 34%, the figure for conventional TV was two times as much as that of desktop computer with about 18%. The percentage of mobile phone stood at over 15% two times as much as that of tablet. Flat Screen TV figures was 8% and laptops was at 20% in 2009.
10 years later, desktop computer decreased from 18% to 12%, with this data desktop computer was treble the figure of conventional TV. The data for flat-screen Tv increased sharply by up to 27%, the highest figure in 2019. Moblie phone increased by 11% compared to 2009. Laptop decreased to 12% and gray increased to 19%.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"watched of" -> "use of"
Explanation: The phrase "watched of" is incorrect. The correct term to describe the use of devices for watching television is "use of."
"the percentage for the number of people watched" -> "the proportion of viewers"
Explanation: "The percentage for the number of people watched" is awkward and unclear. "The proportion of viewers" is more direct and appropriate for academic writing.
"to decreased" -> "decreased"
Explanation: "To decreased" is grammatically incorrect. "Decreased" should be used as a verb without "to."
"In addition, conventional TV data with the most fluctuation dropped with 30% between 2009 and 2019."
Explanation: The phrase "with the most fluctuation dropped with 30%" is awkward and unclear. A clearer and more formal expression would be "Conventional TV usage experienced the greatest decline, with a 30% drop between 2009 and 2019."
"can see that at over 34%" -> "it is evident that"
Explanation: "Can see that at over 34%" is informal and vague. "It is evident that" is more precise and formal.
"two times as much as that of" -> "twice that of"
Explanation: "Two times as much as that of" is verbose and awkward. "Twice that of" is concise and fits better in formal academic writing.
"Flat Screen TV figures was" -> "the figures for flat-screen TVs"
Explanation: "Flat Screen TV figures was" is grammatically incorrect and awkward. "The figures for flat-screen TVs" corrects the grammar and clarifies the meaning.
"laptops was at 20%" -> "laptops was at 20%"
Explanation: This is a typographical error. The correct form is "laptops were at 20%."
"desktop computer decreased from 18% to 12%," -> "the percentage of desktop computer users decreased from 18% to 12%"
Explanation: The original phrase is unclear and lacks subject-verb agreement. The revised version clarifies the subject and verb agreement.
"with this data desktop computer was treble the figure of conventional TV" -> "with this data, the number of desktop computer users was triple that of conventional TV"
Explanation: "Treble" is a verb form that is not commonly used in this context. "Triple" is the correct verb form, and the addition of "the number of desktop computer users" clarifies the subject.
"Moblie phone" -> "Mobile phone"
Explanation: This is a typographical error. "Mobile phone" should be spelled correctly.
"gray increased to 19%" -> "laptops increased to 12%"
Explanation: The original text incorrectly mentions "gray" which is unclear and out of context. It should be corrected to "laptops" to match the topic of the graph.

These changes improve the clarity, grammatical accuracy, and formality of the text, aligning it more closely with academic writing standards.

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 an overview of the main trends, but it does not present a clear overview of the data. The essay also presents some key features, but it does not adequately cover them. For example, the essay states that "conventional TV data with the most fluctuation dropped with 30% between 2009 and 2019," but it does not provide any specific data to support this claim.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clearer overview of the data and by presenting the key features more adequately. The essay could also be improved by providing more specific data to support the claims made. For example, the essay could state that "the percentage of people who watched television on conventional TV decreased from 34% in 2009 to 4% in 2019." This would provide more specific data to support the claim that the percentage of people who watched television on conventional TV decreased.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0
Explanation: The essay presents information with some organization, but there is a noticeable lack of overall progression. While there are attempts to describe the data, the use of cohesive devices is inadequate and at times inaccurate, leading to confusion. The paragraphing is present but not always logical, and some sentences are unclear or poorly constructed, which affects the overall coherence of the essay. For example, phrases such as "with this data desktop computer was treble the figure of conventional TV" are awkwardly phrased and disrupt the flow of information. Additionally, there are grammatical errors and typos (e.g., "Moblie phone" instead of "Mobile phone") that detract from clarity.

How to improve:

Enhance Clarity and Precision: Focus on constructing clearer sentences. Avoid awkward phrasing and ensure that each sentence logically follows the previous one. For example, instead of saying "with this data desktop computer was treble the figure of conventional TV," you could say, "this means that the percentage of desktop computers was three times higher than that of conventional TV."
Use Cohesive Devices Effectively: Work on using a wider range of cohesive devices appropriately. For instance, use linking words such as "however," "in contrast," and "additionally" to create smoother transitions between ideas and paragraphs.
Improve Paragraph Structure: Ensure that each paragraph has a clear central topic and that all sentences within the paragraph support that topic. Consider starting each paragraph with a topic sentence that summarizes the main point.
Proofread for Errors: Take the time to proofread the essay for grammatical errors and typos. This will help improve the overall professionalism and readability of the essay.
Practice Logical Progression: Organize the information in a way that logically progresses from one point to the next, ensuring that the reader can easily follow the argument or description being presented.

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 pie charts, the use of vocabulary is repetitive and lacks sophistication. There are noticeable errors in word choice (e.g., "the number of people watched" should be "the number of people watching"), spelling (e.g., "Moblie" instead of "Mobile"), and word formation (e.g., "gray" instead of "tablets"). These errors may cause some difficulty for the reader in understanding the intended message. Overall, the lexical resource is constrained and does not effectively convey precise meanings.

How to improve: To enhance lexical resource, the writer should aim to expand their vocabulary by incorporating more varied and sophisticated terms related to the topic. This includes using synonyms to avoid repetition and ensuring correct word forms and spellings. Additionally, practicing collocations and phrases commonly used in data description can improve clarity and precision. Reading more academic texts and practicing writing with a focus on vocabulary can also help in achieving a higher band score.

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 forms. However, there are frequent grammatical errors, particularly in subject-verb agreement and sentence structure, which can cause difficulty for the reader. For instance, phrases like "the percentage for the number of people watched of mobile phones" and "with this data desktop computer was treble the figure of conventional TV" are awkwardly constructed and unclear. Additionally, punctuation errors are present, such as missing commas, which further detracts from the overall clarity of the writing.
How to improve: To enhance the grammatical range and accuracy, the writer should focus on the following areas:

Complex Sentence Structures: Practice forming more complex sentences by using subordinate clauses and varied sentence beginnings to improve the overall fluency and sophistication of the writing.
Subject-Verb Agreement: Pay attention to subject-verb agreement and ensure that singular and plural forms are used correctly.
Punctuation: Review punctuation rules to ensure proper use of commas and other punctuation marks, which will help clarify meaning and improve readability.
Proofreading: Take time to proofread the essay for common grammatical errors and awkward phrasing before submission. This can help catch mistakes that may hinder communication.

Bài sửa mẫu

The two pie charts illustrate the devices used by people aged 18-25 to watch television in Canada from 2009 to 2019. Overall, it is clear that the percentage of people watching television on mobile phones, flat-screen TVs, and tablets increased, while the proportion of laptops, desktop computers, and conventional TVs decreased. In addition, conventional TV data showed the most fluctuation, dropping by 30% between 2009 and 2019.

Looking at the charts more closely, it can be seen that, at over 34%, the figure for conventional TV was two times as much as that of desktop computers, which stood at about 18%. The percentage of mobile phone users was over 15%, which was also double that of tablet users. Flat-screen TV figures were at 8%, while laptops accounted for 20% in 2009.

Ten years later, desktop computers decreased from 18% to 12%, making the figure for desktop computers three times that of conventional TV. The data for flat-screen TVs increased sharply to 27%, representing the highest figure in 2019. Mobile phone usage increased by 11% compared to 2009. Laptops decreased to 12%, while tablets rose to 19%.