The three pie charts show the proportion of four kinds of vehicles used in the UK in 1965, 1985 and 2005

The given pie charts depict the percentage of 4 types of transportation used in the UK in 3 years, starting from 1965, with 20-year intervals. It is apparent that private cars dominated all the charts, while recreational vehicles were most rarely used.

In terms of private vehicles, its large proportion kept rising over the period. Starting from 40% of vehicle users in 1965, the statistics increased to over a half and ultimately grew to 60% in 2005, gradually supplanting other vehicles. For the lorries and other cars, it made up for one-fifth of the vehicles in the year of 1965 and remained unchanged in 1985; however, the data decreased a half in two decades later.

The proportion of public transport commenced with 25% and diminished to a fifth in 1985 and acquired 22% at the end of this period. Regarding recreational vehicles, its ratio shows the similar trend with public transport, started with merely 15% and alleviated sharply to 5% in 1985. By 2005, this percentage increased back to 8%, while private cars stopped with 60%.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"The given pie charts" -> "The provided pie charts"
Explanation: "Provided" is more formal and precise than "given," which is somewhat casual and vague in this context.
"dominated all the charts" -> "dominated each of the charts"
Explanation: "Each of the charts" is more specific and avoids the redundancy of "all the charts" in this context.
"its large proportion" -> "its significant proportion"
Explanation: "Significant" is more precise and academically appropriate than "large," which can be vague and less formal.
"kept rising" -> "continued to increase"
Explanation: "Continued to increase" is a more formal expression suitable for academic writing, whereas "kept rising" is somewhat colloquial.
"supplanting other vehicles" -> "displacing other modes of transportation"
Explanation: "Displacing other modes of transportation" is more specific and formal, avoiding the vague term "vehicles."
"made up for" -> "comprised"
Explanation: "Comprised" is more formal and precise than "made up for," which is colloquial and less specific.
"remained unchanged" -> "remained constant"
Explanation: "Remained constant" is a more formal and academically appropriate term than "remained unchanged."
"decreased a half" -> "decreased by half"
Explanation: "Decreased by half" is grammatically correct and more formal than "decreased a half."
"its ratio shows the similar trend" -> "its proportion follows a similar trend"
Explanation: "Follows a similar trend" is more precise and academically appropriate than "shows the similar trend," which is awkward and informal.
"alleviated sharply" -> "dropped significantly"
Explanation: "Dropped significantly" is a more direct and formal way to describe a decrease, whereas "alleviated" is typically used in medical contexts.
"stopped with" -> "remained at"
Explanation: "Remained at" is more precise and formal than "stopped with," which is incorrect in this context.
"its percentage increased back to" -> "its proportion returned to"
Explanation: "Returned to" is more formal and precise than "increased back to," which is less formal and slightly awkward.

These changes enhance the formality and precision of the text, aligning it more closely with academic writing standards.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay provides a general overview of the main trends in the data, but it does not fully satisfy all the requirements of the task. The essay does not present a clear overview of the main trends, differences or stages. The essay also does not adequately highlight key features/bullet points. For example, the essay states that "the proportion of public transport commenced with 25% and diminished to a fifth in 1985 and acquired 22% at the end of this period." However, the essay does not provide any specific details about the changes in the proportion of public transport between 1965 and 1985.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a more detailed overview of the main trends in the data. The essay could also be improved by highlighting key features/bullet points more clearly. For example, the essay could state that the proportion of private cars increased from 40% in 1965 to 60% in 2005, while the proportion of lorries and other cars decreased from 20% in 1965 to 10% in 2005. The essay could also provide more specific details about the changes in the proportion of each type of vehicle over time.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay arranges information and ideas in a coherent manner, presenting a clear overall progression from one time period to another. However, while cohesive devices are used effectively, there are instances where cohesion between sentences is somewhat mechanical, and referencing could be clearer. The paragraphing is present but not always logical, particularly in the way the information is grouped and presented. For example, the discussion of lorries and other cars could be better integrated with the overall narrative of vehicle usage trends.

How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer could focus on improving the logical flow of ideas by ensuring that each paragraph has a clear central topic and that related information is grouped together. Additionally, varying the use of cohesive devices and ensuring that referencing is clear and appropriate would strengthen the overall cohesion of the essay. Finally, a more structured approach to paragraphing, possibly by dedicating separate paragraphs to each vehicle type or time period, would improve clarity and progression.

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 lexical items. However, there are noticeable inaccuracies in word choice and collocation, such as "its large proportion kept rising" and "the data decreased a half," which could be expressed more clearly. Additionally, there are some errors in spelling and word formation, such as "acquired" instead of "increased" and "alleviated" instead of "decreased." While these errors do not severely impede communication, they indicate a need for improvement in precision and control.

How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource score, the writer should focus on using a wider range of vocabulary with greater precision. This includes practicing the correct usage of less common words and ensuring that collocations are appropriate. Additionally, reviewing spelling and word formation rules can help reduce errors. Engaging in exercises that involve paraphrasing and using synonyms can also improve vocabulary flexibility and sophistication.

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. There are some grammatical errors and issues with punctuation, such as "its large proportion kept rising" (should be "their large proportion kept rising" to refer to "private vehicles") and "the data decreased a half" (should be "decreased by half"). These errors do not significantly hinder communication, but they do indicate a lack of full control over grammatical structures. The essay also shows some awkward phrasing, such as "the statistics increased to over a half," which could be more clearly expressed.

How to improve: To achieve a higher band score, the writer should focus on increasing the accuracy of their grammatical structures and punctuation. This can be done by proofreading for common errors, practicing complex sentence forms, and ensuring that subject-verb agreement is maintained throughout the essay. Additionally, enhancing the variety of sentence structures and using more precise vocabulary would contribute to a more sophisticated writing style.

Bài sửa mẫu

The given pie charts depict the percentage of four types of transportation used in the UK in three years, starting from 1965, with 20-year intervals. It is apparent that private cars dominated all the charts, while recreational vehicles were the least utilized.

In terms of private vehicles, their large proportion consistently rose over the period. Starting from 40% of vehicle users in 1965, the figure increased to over half and ultimately grew to 60% in 2005, gradually supplanting other vehicles. For lorries and other cars, they accounted for one-fifth of the vehicles in 1965 and remained unchanged in 1985; however, the data decreased by half two decades later.

The proportion of public transport commenced at 25% and diminished to one-fifth in 1985, before recovering slightly to 22% by the end of this period. Regarding recreational vehicles, their ratio exhibited a similar trend to public transport, starting at merely 15% and declining sharply to 5% in 1985. By 2005, this percentage increased slightly to 8%, while private cars remained at 60%.