The two pie charts show the percentage of qualified graduates in a specific country in 1980 and 2008.

The two pie charts compare the proportion of qualified graduates in a specific country between 1980 and 2008.
Overall, we can see that there were 2 categories arts and science. It is clear from the chart that the rate of science dominated the counterpart.
In particular, master science remained stayble at amost a third in 1980 and 2008.The percentage of PHD science which has just over a tenth in 1980,increased to 30% after amost 4 decades. Additionally, the percentage of first degree science remained stayble over the period.
By contrast, the percentage of art seem to be smaller than the percentage of science. Specifically,the proportion of first degree art was a fourth in 1980. Then, it dropped sharply to just over 10%.Additionally,Master arts has 12% in 1980. Since then, this figure rose to 15%.By contrast, the proportion of phd art which was just a tiny minority in 1980, was at 7% in 2008.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"the two pie charts compare" -> "the two pie charts illustrate"
Explanation: "Illustrate" is more precise and academically appropriate than "compare" when referring to presenting data visually, emphasizing the descriptive nature of the charts.
"proportion of qualified graduates" -> "percentage of graduates with qualifications"
Explanation: "Percentage of graduates with qualifications" is more specific and formal, enhancing clarity and precision in academic writing.
"arts and science" -> "arts and sciences"
Explanation: "Sciences" should be plural to match the plural form "arts," maintaining grammatical consistency and formality.
"the rate of science dominated the counterpart" -> "the proportion of science exceeded that of arts"
Explanation: "Exceeded that of arts" is clearer and more precise, avoiding the awkward and vague "dominated the counterpart."
"master science remained stayble at amost a third" -> "the proportion of master’s degrees in science remained relatively consistent at approximately one-third"
Explanation: This revision corrects grammatical errors and clarifies the meaning, using "relatively consistent" and "approximately one-third" for precision and formality.
"The percentage of PHD science" -> "The proportion of PhD degrees in science"
Explanation: "PhD degrees in science" is the correct term, replacing the incorrect "PHD science" which is grammatically incorrect and unclear.
"increased to 30%" -> "increased to approximately 30%"
Explanation: Adding "approximately" clarifies that the figure is an estimate, which is typical in academic writing.
"the percentage of first degree science" -> "the proportion of first-degree science"
Explanation: "First-degree science" should be hyphenated as "first-degree" to form a compound adjective, adhering to standard English usage.
"the percentage of art seem to be smaller" -> "the proportion of arts appears to be lower"
Explanation: "Appears to be lower" is more formal and precise than "seem to be smaller," and "arts" should be plural to match the context.
"the proportion of first degree art" -> "the proportion of first-degree arts"
Explanation: Again, "first-degree arts" should be hyphenated for grammatical correctness.
"Master arts has 12%" -> "Master’s degrees in arts accounted for 12%"
Explanation: "Accounted for" is more formal and precise than "has," and specifying "Master’s degrees in arts" clarifies the type of degree.
"this figure rose to 15%" -> "this proportion increased to 15%"
Explanation: "Increased" is more specific and appropriate for describing changes in data, aligning better with academic style.
"the proportion of phd art" -> "the proportion of PhD degrees in arts"
Explanation: Corrects the typo "phd" to "PhD" and specifies "degrees in arts" for clarity and formality.
"was at 7%" -> "was approximately 7%"
Explanation: Adding "approximately" indicates an estimate, which is typical in academic writing when presenting data.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6

Explanation: The essay addresses the requirements of the task by providing an overview of the main trends in the data. The essay also presents and adequately highlights key features/bullet points, but some details are irrelevant or inaccurate. For example, the essay states that "the rate of science dominated the counterpart" but does not provide any specific data to support this claim. Additionally, the essay states that "the percentage of PHD science which has just over a tenth in 1980, increased to 30% after amost 4 decades" but this is not accurate. The percentage of PhD science in 1980 was 13%, not just over a tenth.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing more specific data to support the claims made. The essay could also be improved by avoiding irrelevant or inaccurate details. For example, the essay could state that "the percentage of PhD science increased from 13% in 1980 to 30% in 2008" instead of stating that "the percentage of PHD science which has just over a tenth in 1980, increased to 30% after amost 4 decades."

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 the writer attempts to compare the two pie charts, the ideas are not clearly sequenced, leading to confusion in understanding the trends over time. The use of cohesive devices is inadequate and at times inaccurate, which affects the clarity of the relationships between ideas. For example, phrases like "by contrast" are used repetitively without clear logical connections. Additionally, the paragraphing is inconsistent, with some sections appearing as run-on sentences and lacking clear topic sentences. Overall, while some information is conveyed, the coherence and cohesion do not meet the expectations for a higher band score.

How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on logically organizing information and ensuring a clear progression of ideas. This can be achieved by using a wider range of cohesive devices appropriately and avoiding repetitive phrases. Each paragraph should begin with a clear topic sentence that outlines the main idea, followed by supporting details that are logically connected. Additionally, proofreading for grammatical accuracy and clarity will help improve the overall flow of the essay.

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 convey information about the pie charts, the use of vocabulary is repetitive and lacks sophistication. There are noticeable errors in spelling (e.g., "stayble," "amost") and word formation, which may cause some difficulty for the reader. The essay does not effectively utilize less common lexical items, and the overall control of vocabulary is insufficient to convey precise meanings.

How to improve: To improve the lexical resource score, the writer should aim to expand their vocabulary by incorporating a wider range of terms and expressions relevant to the topic. Additionally, focusing on spelling and grammatical accuracy will enhance clarity. Using synonyms and varying sentence structures can help avoid repetition and make the essay more engaging. Finally, practicing the use of less common vocabulary in context will contribute to a more sophisticated lexical range.

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 sentence forms with some attempts at complex sentences. However, the accuracy of these structures is inconsistent, with several grammatical errors present throughout the text. For example, phrases like "remained stayble" and "seem to be smaller" indicate issues with verb forms and agreement. Additionally, punctuation errors, such as missing commas and inconsistent spacing, affect the overall clarity of the writing. While the essay conveys the intended information, the frequency of grammatical errors can cause some difficulty for the reader, which aligns with the characteristics of a Band 5 score.

How to improve: To improve the grammatical range and accuracy, the writer should focus on the following strategies:

Expand Sentence Variety: Incorporate a wider range of complex sentence structures to enhance the sophistication of the writing.
Proofreading: Carefully proofread the essay to catch and correct grammatical errors, particularly with verb forms and punctuation.
Practice: Engage in regular writing practice, focusing on using accurate grammar and varied sentence structures.
Seek Feedback: Obtain feedback from peers or instructors to identify specific areas of weakness and work on them systematically.

Bài sửa mẫu

The two pie charts compare the proportion of qualified graduates in a specific country between 1980 and 2008. Overall, it is evident that there were two categories: arts and science. The data clearly indicates that the rate of science graduates dominated the counterpart.

In particular, the percentage of master’s science graduates remained stable at almost a third in both 1980 and 2008. The proportion of PhD science graduates, which was just over a tenth in 1980, increased to 30% after almost four decades. Additionally, the percentage of first-degree science graduates remained stable over the period.

By contrast, the percentage of art graduates appears to be smaller than that of science graduates. Specifically, the proportion of first-degree art graduates was a fourth in 1980, but then dropped sharply to just over 10%. Furthermore, master’s arts graduates accounted for 12% in 1980, and this figure rose to 15% by 2008. In contrast, the proportion of PhD art graduates, which was a tiny minority in 1980, increased to 7% in 2008.