The table below shows the number of motor vehicles per 1,000 inhabitants in eight countries in 1990 and 2000. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where necessary.

The table below shows the number of motor vehicles per 1,000 inhabitants in eight countries in 1990 and 2000.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where necessary.

The given table depicts the quantity of motorized vehicles per 1,000 denizens in 8 different countries, over a 10-year period from 1990 to 2000.
At first glance, in terms of the rate of the motor, the majority of nations increased sustainably, with Brazil and Romania witnessing paramount growth, although Cambodia hit a plateau in the period.

As can be seen from the table, in 1990, Luxembourg accounted for the most means of transport consumption, respectively around 550 and 531, approximately double that of the Bahamas and tenfold higher than that of Brazil. In the following years, the figure for New Zealand saw a consistent rise of roughly 30 while that of Luxembourg climbed quickly and reached a peak of almost 730, the opposite tendency can be seen when we look at the Bahamas’s consumption, which fell to 187.

Among the eight territories, Jordan marked the bottommost point in using motorized transportation, which is only higher than Cambodia, exactly 50 between 1990 and 2000. In 1990, Chile, the same as Romania, had under 70, which was probably the second-lowest number. By contrast, in 2000, vehicles consumed in Brazil were reported to be at a tremendous improvement, rising from 55 to over 13,500, and remained at the highest positions on the table.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"motorized vehicles per 1,000 denizens" -> "motor vehicles per 1,000 inhabitants"
Explanation: "Denizens" is a less common term compared to "inhabitants," which refers to the people living in a particular place. "Motorized vehicles" can be simplified to "motor vehicles" without loss of meaning.
"in terms of the rate of the motor" -> "in terms of motor vehicle ownership"
Explanation: "Rate of the motor" is unclear and not idiomatic. "Motor vehicle ownership" clarifies that the comparison is about the number of vehicles per population.
"paramount growth" -> "significant growth"
Explanation: "Paramount" means supreme or of the highest importance, which might not accurately convey the level of growth. "Significant" better describes notable growth.
"hit a plateau" -> "reached a plateau"
Explanation: "Hit" is more informal, while "reached" is more suitable for formal writing.
"means of transport consumption" -> "motor vehicle ownership"
Explanation: "Means of transport consumption" is awkward phrasing. "Motor vehicle ownership" is more precise and clear.
"climbed quickly" -> "increased rapidly"
Explanation: "Climbed quickly" is less formal compared to "increased rapidly."
"vehicles consumed" -> "vehicles registered"
Explanation: "Vehicles consumed" implies vehicles being used or utilized, whereas the context refers to the number of vehicles registered or owned.
"marked the bottommost point" -> "registered the lowest"
Explanation: "Bottommost point" is a bit redundant and informal. "Registered the lowest" is clearer.
"exactly 50 between 1990 and 2000" -> "by exactly 50 from 1990 to 2000"
Explanation: "Exactly 50 between 1990 and 2000" is less precise than "by exactly 50 from 1990 to 2000."
"tremendous improvement" -> "significant increase"
Explanation: "Tremendous improvement" is somewhat vague. "Significant increase" provides a clearer description of the change.
"remained at the highest positions on the table" -> "maintained its position as the highest"
Explanation: "Highest positions on the table" is redundant. "Maintained its position as the highest" is more concise.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6

Explanation:
The essay addresses the task by reporting the changes in motor vehicle quantities per 1,000 inhabitants across eight countries over a ten-year period. The writer provides an overview and identifies several key trends, such as the significant increase in motor vehicles in Brazil and Romania, and the plateau in Cambodia. This overview, while somewhat clear, lacks the precision and coherence seen in higher band essays. There is an attempt to highlight key features and make comparisons between different countries, as requested by the task.

However, some information in the essay is reported inaccurately or confusingly, affecting the clarity and reliability of the data presentation. For instance, the claim about Brazil’s motor vehicle numbers rising to "over 13,500" seems implausible and likely represents a misinterpretation of the data, suggesting a lack of careful verification and precision in reporting details. Additionally, the language used to describe the trends ("paramount growth," "hit a plateau") could be more precise and aligned with the formal reporting style expected in Task 1 essays.

How to Improve:

Verify Data Accuracy: Ensure that all data presented is accurate and correctly interpreted from the table. Misrepresentations, like the figures for Brazil, should be double-checked against the source data.
Enhance Clarity and Precision: Use language that more precisely reflects the data presented. Avoid vague or overly dramatic descriptions that may not accurately reflect the changes or trends shown in the data.
Structure Information Logically: Organize the essay in a logical manner that systematically compares the data across countries and years. This will help in presenting a clearer overview and in making it easier for the reader to follow the key points and trends.
Formalize the Reporting Style: Adjust the language to be more formal and objective, as is appropriate for a report. This involves avoiding colloquial expressions and ensuring that the terminology used is suitable for an academic report.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay arranges information and ideas in a coherent manner, with a clear overall progression. It presents a logical organization of information, moving from an introduction to comparisons between countries over the 10-year period. Cohesive devices are used effectively to connect ideas, although there are instances of mechanical cohesion, such as repetitive phrasing. Paragraphing is used, but it could be more logically structured. The central topic within each paragraph is generally clear.
How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, ensure that the transitions between sentences and paragraphs are smoother and more varied. Avoid repetitive phrasing and strive for more diverse vocabulary to improve cohesion. Additionally, refine paragraphing to ensure a more logical flow of ideas, with each paragraph focusing on a distinct aspect of the comparison.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a sufficient range of vocabulary, allowing for some flexibility and precision in expression. It effectively uses less common lexical items, such as "denizens" and "territories," showcasing awareness of style and collocation. There is also evidence of attempted fluency and flexibility in conveying precise meanings. However, occasional errors in word choice and word formation are noticeable. For instance, "paramount growth" could be more precisely stated as "significant growth," and "paramount" is used incorrectly here. Additionally, there are minor inaccuracies in word choice and collocation, such as "witnessing paramount growth" where "experiencing significant growth" would be more appropriate.

How to improve:
To enhance the Lexical Resource, strive for greater accuracy in word choice and collocation. Ensure that less common lexical items are used appropriately and effectively to convey precise meanings. Proofreading for minor errors in word choice, spelling, and word formation will further refine the lexical sophistication of the essay. Additionally, aim for more variety in vocabulary usage to add richness and depth to the expression.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. There is an attempt to use a variety of sentence forms, including compound and complex sentences, although some of these structures could be more effectively developed. The essay shows a reasonable level of grammatical control with occasional errors, such as "the majority of nations increased sustainably," where "sustainably" may not be the most appropriate word choice, and "in the period" could be clarified for better coherence. However, these errors do not significantly impede communication.

How to improve:
To enhance grammatical range and accuracy, strive for greater variety in sentence structures, incorporating more complex constructions consistently throughout the essay. Pay close attention to word choice and clarity, ensuring that each sentence contributes clearly to the overall meaning of the essay. Additionally, proofreading for grammatical errors and punctuation inconsistencies can help improve the overall accuracy of the essay.

Bài sửa mẫu

The provided table illustrates the number of motor vehicles per 1,000 individuals in eight distinct countries during the years 1990 and 2000.

Initially, regarding motor vehicle rates, the majority of nations experienced sustainable increases, with Brazil and Romania showing significant growth, while Cambodia maintained a relatively stable rate throughout the period.

Analyzing the data, in 1990, Luxembourg had the highest vehicle consumption at approximately 550 vehicles per 1,000 people, followed by New Zealand and the Bahamas with around 531 and 118, respectively. Notably, Luxembourg’s consumption surged to nearly 730 vehicles per 1,000 individuals by 2000, whereas the Bahamas witnessed a decline to 187 vehicles per 1,000 individuals.

Among these nations, Jordan had the lowest vehicle consumption, slightly higher than Cambodia, with a difference of 50 vehicles per 1,000 individuals from 1990 to 2000. Initially, Chile and Romania had the lowest consumption rates at under 70 vehicles per 1,000 people in 1990, with Brazil notably increasing its consumption from 55 to over 13,500 vehicles per 1,000 individuals by 2000, marking the most substantial increase among the observed countries.

Overall, the data indicates significant variations in motor vehicle consumption among the countries over the ten-year period.