The table shows the cost of water in 5 cities in Australia. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.

The table illustrates how much money was spent on water by families divided into two different types of expense targets in five cities in Australia.

As can be inferred from the table, four urban areas used water over 125 kL, which was higher than that of up to 125 kL, saved for Sydney. Additionally, Perth homes recorded the highest figure on the average bill, whereas the lowest usage of water was seen in Melbourne.

0.42 million dollars was allocated into water bills in Adelaide and Perth, which were the lowest spending of below 125 kL. While Sydney registered the highest cost in the aforementioned at 0.98 million, followed by Brisbane and Melbourne at 0.81 million and 0.78 million, respectively.

In comparison, Australian homes in these cities consumed water over 125 kL were higher than those that spent up to 125 kL. Meanwhile, the water consumption of Sydney and Melbourne remained at 0.98 and 0.78, respectively; the reverse was true for Brisbane and Adelaide. As for home spending over 125 kL, the expenditure on water of Perth families trumped by 1.08 million, which became the area that consumed the highest amount of water ($332), while Melbourne witnessed the smallest figure out of the examination, at $253.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"As can be inferred from the table" -> "It can be inferred from the table"
Explanation: Removing the possessive pronoun "As" corrects the grammatical structure, making the sentence more direct and formal.
"used water over 125 kL" -> "used more than 125 kL of water"
Explanation: "Used water over" is awkward and incorrect; "used more than" is the correct comparative expression, and adding "of water" clarifies the prepositional phrase.
"which was higher than that of up to 125 kL, saved for Sydney" -> "which exceeded the 125 kL allocated to Sydney"
Explanation: The original phrase is unclear and awkward. The revised version clarifies that the amount spent is greater than the allocated amount for Sydney.
"homes recorded the highest figure on the average bill" -> "homes incurred the highest average bill"
Explanation: "Recorded the highest figure on the average bill" is verbose and unclear. "Incurred the highest average bill" is more direct and appropriate for academic writing.
"the lowest usage of water was seen in Melbourne" -> "Melbourne showed the lowest water usage"
Explanation: "Was seen" is too informal and vague; "showed" is more precise and formal.
"0.42 million dollars was allocated into water bills" -> "approximately $0.42 million was allocated to water bills"
Explanation: "Was allocated into" is incorrect; "was allocated to" is the correct preposition. Also, adding "approximately" before the dollar figure is more precise and formal.
"the lowest spending of below 125 kL" -> "the lowest spending below 125 kL"
Explanation: Removing "of" corrects the grammatical error and improves readability.
"the aforementioned at 0.98 million" -> "at $0.98 million"
Explanation: "The aforementioned" is redundant and informal; "at $0.98 million" is concise and maintains formality.
"consumed water over 125 kL were higher than those that spent up to 125 kL" -> "those consuming more than 125 kL spent more than those consuming up to 125 kL"
Explanation: The original is awkward and unclear. The revised version clarifies the comparison and is more formal.
"the water consumption of Sydney and Melbourne remained at 0.98 and 0.78" -> "Sydney and Melbourne maintained water consumption levels of $0.98 million and $0.78 million"
Explanation: The original is awkwardly phrased; the revision clarifies the numbers and uses a more formal structure.
"the reverse was true for Brisbane and Adelaide" -> "the reverse was true for Brisbane and Adelaide, respectively"
Explanation: Adding "respectively" clarifies that the comparison is between the two cities, improving the formal tone.
"the area that consumed the highest amount of water ($332)" -> "the area with the highest water consumption, at $332"
Explanation: "The area that consumed the highest amount of water" is verbose and informal; "the area with the highest water consumption, at $332" is more concise and formal.
"out of the examination, at $253" -> "at $253, as part of the examination"
Explanation: "Out of the examination" is incorrect; "as part of the examination" is the correct phrase to use in this context.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5

Explanation: The essay attempts to address the task by providing some information about the cost of water in five Australian cities. However, the essay does not present a clear overview of the main features of the data. The essay also includes some irrelevant and inaccurate details, such as the statement that "Perth homes recorded the highest figure on the average bill." This statement is not supported by the data in the table.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clearer overview of the main features of the data. The essay should also focus on presenting accurate and relevant information. For example, the essay could state that the average bill per household was highest in Perth and lowest in Melbourne. The essay could also compare the cost of water for different usage levels in different cities.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay arranges information and ideas coherently, and there is a clear overall progression in the discussion of water costs across the cities. However, while cohesive devices are used, there are instances of mechanical or faulty cohesion, particularly in the transitions between sentences and ideas. The referencing could be clearer, as some sentences lack proper connections to previous statements. Additionally, paragraphing is present but not always logical, which affects the overall clarity of the essay.

How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on using a wider range of cohesive devices more effectively, ensuring that transitions between ideas are smooth and logical. Improving the clarity of referencing will help readers follow the argument more easily. Additionally, organizing the information into clearer paragraphs that each focus on a single aspect of the data would improve the overall structure and readability of the essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary relevant to the task, with some attempts to use less common terms. However, there are noticeable inaccuracies in word choice and collocation, such as "the aforementioned" and "trumped by," which may confuse the reader. Additionally, there are errors in spelling and word formation, such as "0.42 million dollars was allocated into water bills," which should be "allocated to." These errors do not completely impede communication but do detract from the overall clarity and precision of the essay.

How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource score, the writer should focus on using a wider range of vocabulary accurately and appropriately. This includes practicing the correct usage of collocations and ensuring that less common vocabulary is used in a contextually appropriate manner. Additionally, proofreading for spelling and grammatical errors can help improve clarity and coherence. Engaging with more complex sentence structures and varied vocabulary will also contribute to a higher band score.

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 a characteristic of Band 6. There are some grammatical errors and issues with punctuation, such as "the lowest usage of water was seen in Melbourne," which could be more clearly articulated. While the meaning is generally clear, certain errors can cause minor confusion for the reader. The essay does attempt to compare data effectively, but the structure and clarity could be improved for better communication.

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

Complex Sentence Structures: Incorporate more varied and complex sentence structures while ensuring accuracy.
Error Reduction: Proofread the essay to minimize grammatical and punctuation errors, as these can hinder clarity.
Clarity and Cohesion: Improve the logical flow of ideas and comparisons to enhance overall coherence. Using linking words effectively can help in this regard.
Precision in Language: Use more precise language to convey comparisons and data, ensuring that the reader can easily follow the analysis presented.

Bài sửa mẫu

The table illustrates the amount of money spent on water by families, categorized into two different types of expense targets across five cities in Australia.

As can be inferred from the table, four urban areas consumed over 125 kL of water, which was higher than the usage of up to 125 kL recorded for Sydney. Additionally, Perth homes reported the highest average bill, while the lowest water usage was observed in Melbourne.

$0.42 million was allocated to water bills in Adelaide and Perth, representing the lowest spending for households using below 125 kL. In contrast, Sydney registered the highest cost at $0.98 million, followed by Brisbane and Melbourne at $0.81 million and $0.78 million, respectively.

In comparison, Australian homes in these cities that consumed over 125 kL spent more than those that spent up to 125 kL. Meanwhile, the water consumption figures for Sydney and Melbourne remained at $0.98 million and $0.78 million, respectively; the opposite was true for Brisbane and Adelaide. Regarding households spending over 125 kL, the expenditure on water for Perth families reached $1.08 million, making it the area with the highest water consumption ($332), while Melbourne recorded the lowest figure in the analysis at $253.