The bar chart shows different methods of waste disposal in four cities: Toronto, Madrid, Kuala Lumpur and Amman. Summarize the information by describing the main features of the chart and making comparisons where appropriate.

Part 1 (Academic)
6.5

Sample Essay with Corrections

The bar graphs provide information about how four metropolises - Toronto, Madrid, Kuala Lumpur, and Amman - dispose of their garbage. There is a comparison between landfill, incineration, and recycling in percentage. At first glance, we can see that landfills have the highest percentages for all of the cities. Amman is relyingrelies on landfill the most, at around 93%. While Toronto and Kuala Lumpur also mainly use landfill, Madrid is lowest in usinghas the lowest reliance on this method, instead haveing higher rates of recycling and incineration of waste. Looking at recycling percentages, we see that Madrid does the most recycling at roughly 21%. Toronto also recycles quite mucha lot, about 19% of their waste. Kuala Lumpur and Amman, on the other hand, only recycle very little - under 10% each. This means that Madrid and Toronto isare focusing more on recycling compared to the other two city.ies. For incineration, there are large differences between the cities. Kuala Lumpur and Amman are not incinerating waste almost at all, as the percentages are too small. ButHowever, Madrid is at almost 15%, while Toronto is around 7%. Therefore, Madrid seems to be using this method a lot whilesignificantly more than Amman and Kuala Lumpur do not use. To summarize, the graph shows how different cities have various strategies for waste disposal. While most cities relying on landfill overall, some are prioritizing recycling and incinerationg more. Madrid is the best example forof a city trying to reduce landfill use through other techniques.
DeletedOriginal textAddedCorrected text

Expert Feedback

The essay effectively addresses the task by summarizing the main features of the bar chart and making comparisons between the cities. Key strengths include a clear structure and the inclusion of relevant data points. However, critical areas for improvement include grammatical accuracy, coherence in transitions, and lexical variety. Structural changes made include correcting grammatical errors, enhancing clarity in descriptions, and improving transitions between ideas. Suggestions for further improvements not implemented in the corrected version include varying vocabulary to avoid repetition and incorporating more cohesive devices to enhance the flow of ideas. The tone used is appropriate for an academic context, maintaining a formal and informative style.

Detailed Scores

Coherence And Cohesion
The essay has a logical structure, but the flow of ideas could be improved. Some sentences are slightly disjointed, and the use of cohesive devices is limited. For example, transitions between comparisons could be smoother. To enhance coherence, the writer could use more linking phrases and ensure that each paragraph clearly relates to the overall summary.
6.0
Grammatical Range And Accuracy
The writing demonstrates a reasonable range of grammatical structures, but there are several grammatical errors and awkward constructions (e.g., 'landfill have the highest percentage' should be 'landfills have the highest percentages'). These errors affect clarity and accuracy. To improve, the writer should focus on proofreading for grammatical correctness and varying sentence structures.
6.0
Lexical Resource
The vocabulary used is generally appropriate, but there are instances of repetition (e.g., 'landfill' and 'recycling') that could be varied. The use of terms like 'metropolis' and 'strategies' is commendable, but the writer could benefit from incorporating a wider range of synonyms and expressions to enhance the sophistication of the language.
6.5
Task Achievement
The response addresses the task by summarizing the main features of the bar chart and making comparisons between the cities. However, it lacks some clarity in presenting the data, and there are minor inaccuracies in the descriptions (e.g., 'incineration of waste' could be more clearly defined). To improve, the writer should ensure that all key data points are accurately represented and consider providing a clearer overview of the trends.
6.5

Related Writing Samples

Part 1 (Academic)
8.0

You eat at your college cafeteria every lunch time. However, you think it needs some improvements. Write a letter to the college magazine. In your letter, explain what you like about the cafeteria say what is wrong with it suggest how it could be improved

Part 1 (Academic)
6.5

The graph below shows average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person in the United Kingdom, Sweden, Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

Part 1 (Academic)
6.0

The graph below gives information about the percentage of the population in four Asian countries living in cities from 1970 to 2020, with predictions for 2030 and 2040. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

Part 1 (Academic)
5.0

The pie charts show the destination of export goods in three countries in 2010.

Part 1 (Academic)
5.0

The chart below shows the expenditure of two countries on consumer goods in 2010.

Part 1 (Academic)
5.0

"Violence in playgrounds is increasing. However, it is important that parents should teach children not to hit back at bullies."