The pie chart below shows the main reasons why students chose to study at a particular UK university in 1987 and in 2007. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The charts illustrate the major causes make students went for studying at a particular university in the UK in 1987 and 2007.
Overall, there was a significant decline in the number of students studied because they wanted to close to parental, quality of teaching and good sports and social activities, while an oppositte trend can be seen in the figure for those choosing for quality of resourse and suitable degree couruses. In addition, the reason "suitable degree couruses" made up the biggest percent in both years.
The percentage of students' idea for suitable degree couruses started at 35%, after which it saw a slight rise by 2% in 2007. Futher more, only 10% for individuals studied in a UK university because they wanted to near their parents in 1987, with more than two – fold increasing to 22% twenty years later.
The proportion of youngers who needed quality of resource decreased moderately by 4%, ending at 17%. 15% students said that they had chosen because of teaching quality almost havled. A similar change can be seen in the figure for youngsters who wanted to receive good sports and social activities, which nearly tripled (from 19% to 6%).

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"The charts illustrate the major causes make students went for studying at a particular university in the UK in 1987 and 2007." -> "The charts illustrate the primary reasons why students chose to study at a specific university in the UK in 1987 and 2007."
Explanation: The original phrase "make students went for studying" is grammatically incorrect and awkward. The revised version corrects the verb tense and uses more formal language appropriate for academic writing.
"because they wanted to close to parental" -> "because they wanted to be close to their parents"
Explanation: "close to parental" is incorrect and unclear. The revised phrase clarifies the intended meaning and uses the correct possessive form "their parents."
"quality of teaching and good sports and social activities" -> "the quality of teaching and the provision of good sports and social activities"
Explanation: Adding "the" before "quality of teaching" and "provision of" enhances clarity and formality, aligning better with academic style.
"an oppositte trend" -> "an opposite trend"
Explanation: "oppositte" is a typographical error. Correcting it to "opposite" maintains the intended meaning and ensures accuracy.
"choosing for quality of resourse" -> "choosing for the quality of resources"
Explanation: "resourse" is a typographical error and lacks the article "the" before "quality of resources," which is necessary for grammatical correctness and clarity.
"suitable degree couruses" -> "suitable degree courses"
Explanation: "couruses" is a typographical error. Correcting it to "courses" fixes the spelling and maintains professionalism.
"Futher more" -> "Furthermore"
Explanation: "Futher" is a typographical error. Correcting it to "Furthermore" is the correct form, enhancing the formal tone of the text.
"Futher more, only 10% for individuals studied in a UK university because they wanted to near their parents in 1987, with more than two – fold increasing to 22% twenty years later." -> "Furthermore, only 10% of individuals chose to study in a UK university in 1987 because they wanted to be near their parents, which more than doubled to 22% twenty years later."
Explanation: The original sentence is grammatically incorrect and awkward. The revision corrects the verb tense and clarifies the meaning, improving readability and formality.
"youngers" -> "younger students"
Explanation: "youngers" is not a standard term in English. Using "younger students" corrects this and maintains the intended meaning.
"quality of resource" -> "quality of resources"
Explanation: "resource" should be plural "resources" to match the context of multiple resources available at a university.
"almost havled" -> "almost halved"
Explanation: "havled" is a typographical error. Correcting it to "halved" provides the correct term for a reduction by half.
"nearly tripled" -> "nearly tripled from"
Explanation: Adding "from" after "nearly tripled" clarifies the comparison, enhancing the sentence structure and readability.

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 does not provide a clear overview of the main trends, and the information is recounted mechanically. The essay presents some key features, but it does not adequately cover them. For example, the essay states that the percentage of students choosing "suitable degree courses" saw a slight rise by 2% in 2007, but it does not mention that this was the only reason that saw an increase. The essay also focuses on details, such as the fact that the proportion of students who wanted to be near their parents increased more than two-fold, but it does not provide any context for this information.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clearer overview of the main trends. The essay should also focus on the key features of the data, rather than on details. The essay could also be improved by providing more context for the information presented. For example, the essay could explain why the percentage of students choosing "suitable degree courses" increased in 2007.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 4

Band Score: 4.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates some attempt to organize information, but it lacks overall coherence and progression. There is no clear structure to guide the reader through the information presented. Sentences are often awkwardly phrased or contain errors, which hinders understanding. The use of cohesive devices is basic and sometimes inaccurate, such as "an oppositte trend" instead of "an opposite trend." Paragraphing is inconsistent, with some ideas not logically grouped together. Overall, the essay lacks clarity and coherence in presenting the information from the charts.

How to improve:

Organization and Structure: Ensure a clear introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion structure. Each paragraph should focus on one main idea.
Cohesion and Sentence Structure: Use cohesive devices (linking words, pronouns, etc.) correctly to connect ideas logically within and between sentences.
Language Accuracy: Pay attention to grammar, punctuation, and word choice to avoid errors that disrupt the flow of ideas.
Paragraphing: Make sure each paragraph has a clear topic sentence and contains related information that supports the main idea of the paragraph.

By improving these aspects, the essay can achieve better coherence and cohesion, leading to a more effective communication of the information presented in the charts.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 4

Band Score: 4.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a limited range of vocabulary with frequent errors in word choice, spelling, and word formation. There are several instances of awkward phrasing and grammatical errors that hinder clarity and coherence. The overall lexical resource lacks variety and sophistication, relying on basic vocabulary and repetitive use of words like "students," "quality," and "figure." These issues contribute to a lack of precision in conveying meanings, and the errors in word formation and spelling occasionally strain comprehension.

How to improve:

Expand Vocabulary: Introduce a wider range of vocabulary appropriate to academic writing, such as "undergraduates," "academic resources," "academic disciplines" instead of repetitive use of "students" and "degree courses."
Correct Errors: Pay careful attention to word choice, spelling, and word formation. Proofreading and editing for clarity and accuracy are crucial.
Improve Sentence Structure: Work on sentence structure to enhance coherence and ensure ideas are expressed clearly and logically.

Improving these aspects will help elevate the lexical resource and overall quality of the essay to meet higher band descriptors.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 4

Band Score: 4.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates an attempt at using a mix of simple and complex sentence forms. There is an effort to convey information with some clarity, despite numerous grammatical errors and issues with punctuation. The essay lacks consistency in accuracy and fluency, which significantly impacts readability and coherence.

How to improve:

Grammar and Punctuation: Focus on improving accuracy in grammar and punctuation. Pay attention to subject-verb agreement, tense consistency, and sentence structure.
Sentence Structure: Aim for more varied and complex sentence structures. Incorporate a mix of simple and complex sentences to enhance clarity and coherence.
Clarity and Coherence: Ensure that each sentence contributes to the overall clarity and coherence of the essay. Avoid abrupt shifts in topic or unclear connections between ideas.

Improving these areas will help elevate the essay towards higher band scores by enhancing grammatical accuracy and overall clarity in communication.

Bài sửa mẫu

The pie charts illustrate the primary reasons why students chose to study at a specific UK university in 1987 and 2007. Overall, there was a notable shift in student preferences during this twenty-year period.

In both years, the most significant factor influencing students’ decisions was the availability of suitable degree courses, constituting the largest proportion. In 1987, this stood at 35%, increasing slightly to 37% by 2007.

Conversely, the desire to be near parents declined substantially over the years, from 10% in 1987 to 22% in 2007, marking more than a two-fold increase.

The importance placed on quality of resources experienced a moderate decrease, falling from 21% in 1987 to 17% in 2007. Similarly, the appeal of quality teaching saw a significant decline, nearly halving from 30% to 15% over the same period.

Interestingly, the preference for good sports and social activities underwent a dramatic transformation, nearly tripling from 6% in 1987 to 17% in 2007.

In summary, while reasons such as suitable degree courses and proximity to parents experienced notable shifts, preferences for quality teaching and social activities showed significant changes over the twenty-year period.