1. Student
1.1. Andy Template
1.1.1. Intro
1.1.2. Overview
1.1.3. 2 Details
1.1.3.1. Details 1
1.1.3.2. Details 2
1.2. Linh Truong
1.2.1. Intro
1.2.1.1. The pie graphs show the total spending of a UK school in three different years over a period of 20 years.
1.2.1.1.1. ~OK
1.2.1.1.2. compare the yearly expenditure
1.2.2. Overview
1.2.2.1. It is clear that teachers’ salaries took account of the largest percentage of the school’s expenditure in all three years:1981,1991 and 2001; while insurance made up the smallest proportion cost in every year.
1.2.2.1.1. x take account of
1.2.2.1.2. this sentence is too long
1.2.2.1.3. smallest proportion cost
1.2.3. 2 Details
1.2.3.1. Details 1
1.2.3.1.1. In 1981, the proportion of expenditure on teachers’ salaries was 40%, went up to 50% in 1991. However,this figure dropped again by 5% in 2001.The percentage of spending on other workers’ salaries fell significantly over a 20-year period,from 28% of the total spending in 1981 to only 15% in 2001.
1.2.3.2. Details 2
1.2.3.2.1. Only 2% of the school’s budget went on insurance in 1981,but achieved 8% in 2001. Finally, the resources and furniture and equipment cost fluctuated. The percentage of spending on resources was highest at 20% in 1991 and lowest at 9% in 2001.Whereas the figure for furniture and equipment reached its peak in 2001,at 23% and reached its low in 1991,at 5%.
1.3. Trang Lake
1.3.1. Intro
1.3.1.1. The pie chart illustrates th expenditure of a UK school in three different years 1981, 1991 and 2001.
1.3.2. Overview
1.3.2.1. From an overall perspective, one of the most outstanding features is that there was a significant difference in the percentage of spending. Actually, the figure given for teachers’ salaries made up the largest one in all three years (1981, 1991 and 2001), with 40%, 50% and 45%, respectively. Nevertheless, the porpotion of money used for insurance appeared to be by far the lowest ones in 1981, 1991 and 2001. The figure were observed to be 2%, 3% and 8%, respectively.
1.3.2.1.1. From an overall perspective, one of the most outstanding features is that there was a significant difference in the percentage of spending.
1.3.2.1.2. this does not appear to be well-structured
1.3.2.2. In 1981, 15% of the school’s budget went on resources . This figure rose by 5% in 1991, but fell again to 9% in 2001. Expenditure on other workers’ salaries stood at 28% of the total in 1981, but then bottomed off 15% in 2001. Finally, the proportion for resources and furniture/equipment decreased slightly to 5% from 1981 to 1991, before increased dramatically to 23% in 2001
1.3.2.2.1. In 1981, 15% of the school’s budget went on resources .
1.3.2.2.2. why would you pick resources now? a little bit of explanation for your choice would be helpful. Otherwise, this just means that you randomly selects things to fill up the paragraph
1.3.2.3. Details 1
1.3.3. 2 Details
1.3.3.1. Details 2
2. Non-booked
2.1. Linh Thao
2.1.1. Intro
2.1.1.1. These pie charts show the expenditure of a UK school in three different years 1981, 1991, and 2001.
2.1.1.1.1. The pie charts given
2.1.1.1.2. The 3 pie charts
2.1.1.1.3. 3 different years, namely 1981...
2.1.2. Overview
2.1.2.1. In general, teachers’ salaries were the highest proportion of annual spending percentage. In contrast, insurance was consistent as the lowest percentage of annual school spending over the times observed.
2.1.2.1.1. "in general"
2.1.2.1.2. highest proportion of annual spending percentage.
2.1.2.1.3. we don't use "to be the proportion" in this sense, we use "take up the biggest proportion", or "the proportion of.. is..."
2.1.2.1.4. was consistently the lowest in terms of percentage compared to others
2.1.3. 2 Details
2.1.3.1. Details 1
2.1.3.1.1. In 1981 teacher’s salaries accounted for nearly a half of the total school costs. However, the number of teachers’ salaries increased significantly to 50% which remained the highest spending while in 2001 this figure fell to 45%. The proportion of expenditure on other workers’ wages declined steadily throughout 20 years, from 28% of the budget in 1981 to only 15% in 2001.
2.1.4. Details 2
2.1.4.1. On the other hand, insurance was the lowest percentage of total school spending over the 20-year period. It was only 2% of total spending in 1981 and rose steadily in 1991 and 2001, 3% and 8% respectively.
2.1.4.1.1. we only say "19% is the lowest percentage, not "insurance was the lowest percentage". We say "insurance took up/made up/accounted for the lowest percentage"
2.1.4.1.2. at 3% and 8% respectively
2.2. Lai Phuong Thao
2.2.1. Intro
2.2.1.1. The pie chart displays the expenditure of a school in the UK in three different years 1981, 1991, and 2001.
2.2.1.1.1. not just one chart
2.2.1.1.2. COPY sIMON
2.2.2. Overview
2.2.2.1. It can be seen from the chart that teachers’ salaries were the largest proportion of the school’s spending in the years shown. Whereas, insurance was the continuously smallest cost in each year.
2.2.2.1.1. x "x were the largest proportion"
2.2.2.1.2. wrong use of whereas
2.2.3. 2 Details
2.2.3.1. Details 1
2.2.3.1.1. In 1981, 40% of the school’s budget was spent on teachers’ salaries. This figure increased a little more than a half in 1991, but fell slightly by 5% in 2001. The proportion of expenditure on the other workers’ salaries witnessed a minimal drop over a period of 20-year, from 20% of the budget in 1981 to only 15% in 2001.
2.2.3.2. Details 2
2.2.3.2.1. Insurance’s budget accounted for only 2% of the total in 1981 and reached a new high in 2001, about 8%. Finally, the percentages for resources and furniture/ equipment were similar in 1981, accounting for 15%. However, the former declined from 20% to 9% and the latter climbed gradually from 5% to 23% between 1991 and 2001.
2.3. Huan
2.3.1. Intro
2.3.1.1. The graph makes a comparison among sum of school spending in three different years from 1981 to 2001.
2.3.1.1.1. strange phrase
2.3.1.1.2. this is not about the sum: the sizes of the pies are exactly the same, and are always 100%. Pie charts are about the distribution/importance of different components. The language used should include percentages.
2.3.2. Overview
2.3.2.1. It is clear from the graph that salary was the element which toke most total school consume.
2.3.2.1.1. By contrast, a little money is only paid for insurance.
2.3.2.1.2. salary
2.3.2.1.3. toke?
2.3.2.1.4. consume is a verb, not a noun
2.3.2.1.5. most total school consume.?
2.3.2.1.6. "was the element" is quite creative, but it would not be natural here
2.3.2.2. Teachers’ salaries held the largest ratio in all 3 different years. In 1981, the figure was 40%, then it rose to half of total budget after 1 decade. For next 10 years, amount of money for teacher’ earnings decreased by 5% and remained at 45% in 2001. Nearly one third school spending in 1981 was other workers’ salaries. The cost for it continuously fell and at the end of the period the figure was one third as much as teachers’ salaries.
2.3.2.2.1. Teachers’ salaries held the largest ratio in all 3 different years
2.3.2.2.2. for the next 10 years
2.3.2.2.3. the amount of
2.3.2.2.4. one third of
2.3.3. 2 Details
2.3.3.1. Details 1
2.3.3.2. Details 2
2.3.3.2.1. Spending the smallest cost, although only toke 2% in 1981, the rate was up to 8% in 2001. In a similar way, furniture and equipment also went up. The total cost climbed from 15% to 23% for the whole of period. Finally, the proportion of spending for resources books increased one third of itself to peak 20% in 1991, but reduced again to 9% in 2001
2.4. Tham
2.4.1. Intro
2.4.1.1. The pie charts display the total expenditure of a school in the UK in different year over period 20 years.
2.4.1.1.1. over a period of
2.4.1.2. It is clear that the teachers’ salaries were the largest proportion of the school’s spending in three year (1981, 1991, 2001). In contrast, insurance was the smallest proportion cost in each year.
2.4.1.2.1. in 3 years
2.4.1.3. In 1981, the schools’ budget for teachers’ salaries was 40 %, and grew up 50% in 1991 but the figure decreased 45% in 2001. The proportion of other worker’s wage steadily fall over period 20 years from 28 % in 1981 to 15% in 2001.
2.4.1.3.1. grew to 50%
2.4.1.3.2. decreased to
2.4.1.3.3. over the period
2.4.1.4. The percentages for furniture/equipment and resource fluctuated, the largest spending of resource reached at 20% in 1991 while furniture and equipment s’ spending climbed up 23% in 2001. Insurance’s cost grow up each year from 2% in 1981 to 8% in 2001
2.4.1.4.1. no cohesion? Firstly, secondly
2.4.1.4.2. "grew up" - in the past
2.4.2. Overview
2.4.3. 2 Details
2.4.3.1. Details 1
2.4.3.1.1. 8
2.4.3.2. Details 2
2.5. Quynh
2.5.1. Intro
2.5.1.1. The pie charts describe spending proportion of a school in the UK in three different years over a 20-year period.
2.5.1.1.1. describe spending proportion" is not really correct, see the original answer
2.5.1.2. It is clear that teachers’ salaries took over the biggest rate of the school’s expenditure in 1981, 1991 and 2001. Vice versa, budget for insurance is the smallest cost in each year.
2.5.1.2.1. biggest proportion, rate is a word that has a different meaning
2.5.1.2.2. "highest expenditure" is strange
2.5.1.2.3. "budget is the smallest cost" is wrong
2.5.1.2.4. took over is not appropriate here. You take over the 1st position of someone else, effectively beating them. Here it has always been the same (at the top) You take up 1st position - someone else take over that from you
2.5.1.3. In 1981, 40% of the school’s budget was teachers’ salaries. This figure increased to 50% in 1991, but dropped to 45% in 2001. The proportion of spending on other workers’ wages declined dramatically during 20-year period, from 28% of the budget in 1981 to only 15% in 2001.
2.5.1.3.1. this part is much better
2.5.1.4. Spending on insurance stabilized at 2% only of whole picture in 1981, but levelled off at 8% in 2001. Finally, the percentages for resources and furniture/equipment fluctuated. The figure for resources was highest at 20% in 1991 and the rate of spending on furniture and equipment reached its peak in 2001, at 23%.
2.5.1.4.1. "at 2% only of whole picture in 1981"?
2.5.1.4.2. levelled off is not correct
2.5.1.4.3. Finally, the percentages for resources and furniture/equipment fluctuated. The figure for resources was highest at 20% in 1991 and the rate of spending on furniture and equipment reached its peak in 2001, at 23%.
2.5.2. Overview
2.5.3. 2 Details
2.5.3.1. Details 1
2.5.3.2. Details 2
3. The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by a particular UK school in 1981,1991 and 2001.
3.1. Simon
3.1.1. Intro
3.1.1.1. The pie charts compare the expenditure of a school in the UK in three different years over a 20-year period.
3.1.2. Overview
3.1.2.1. It is clear that teachers’ salaries made up the largest proportion of the school’s spending in all three years (1981, 1991 and 2001). By contrast, insurance was the smallest cost in each year.
3.1.2.1.1. It is clear that teachers’ salaries made up the largest proportion of the school’s spending in all three years (1981, 1991 and 2001).
3.1.3. 2 Details
3.1.3.1. Details 1
3.1.3.1.1. In 1981, 40% of the school’s budget went on teachers’ salaries. This figure rose to 50% in 1991, but fell again by 5% in 2001. The proportion of spending on other workers’ wages fell steadily over the 20-year period, from 28% of the budget in 1981 to only 15% in 2001.
3.1.3.2. Details 2
3.1.3.2.1. Expenditure on insurance stood at only 2% of the total in 1981, but reached 8% in 2001. Finally, the percentages for resources and furniture/equipment fluctuated. The figure for resources was highest in 1991, at 20%, and the proportion of spending on furniture and equipment reached its peak in 2001, at 23%.
3.1.3.3. You can see that I chose to put the two types of salaries together in one paragraph, and the other three categories together in the second paragraph. There are other ways to divide the information, but this seemed the most obvious way to me.
3.1.3.4. Why do we need two paragraphs?
3.1.3.4.1. The answer is that this encourages you to divide the information into 2 groups, and hopefully this means that your essay will be better organised and you’ll make some useful comparisons.