MT S BI MU CHO CC TASK 1 NM 2017

BY NGOC BACH

I. LINE GRAPH .............................................................................................................. 2

V d 11: Percentage of female MPs ( thi 03-06-2017) .......................................................... 2

II. BAR CHART ............................................................................................................... 4

V d 12: Film production in 5 countries (11/03/2017) ............................................................. 4

V d 13: renewable energy of the total supply (15/04/2017) ..................................................... 7

V d 14: Population in UK and Wales ( 25/2/2017) ............................................................. 9

V d 15: Government spending on roads and transport ( 13/05/17) ..................................... 12

III. PROCESS .............................................................................................................. 15

V d 7: ( thi 29/04/2017) Process of waste treatment ......................................................... 15

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 1

 I. LINE GRAPH
V d 11: Percentage of female MPs ( thi 03-06-2017)

The chart below shows the percentage of female members of parliament in 5

European countries from 2000 to 2012

T h e p erc entage o f femal e memb ers o f p ar l i ament i n

E u ro p ean c o u nt r i es (2 0 0 0 - 2 0 1 2 )
40

35

30 Germany
25 Italy

20 France
UK
15
Belgium
10

0
2000 2004 2008 2012
Year

Report Plan

Paraphrase compares/proportion/name the 5 countries.

Summary paragraph percentages all rose over the period; highest
percentage in Italy 2012.
Paragraph 3: Germany, Italy, France. Germany and France both
steady increases. Italy more significant increase. Compare trends,
give 2000 and 2012 figures + Italy 2008.
Paragraph 4: Belgium and the UK contrast trends: dramatic
increase in the UK, rise and fall in Belgium. Both 23% in 2012.

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 2

Report:
The line graph compares the proportion of women as members of parliament in
Germany, Italy, France, the UK and Belgium between 2000 and 2012.

Overall, the percentage of female MPs rose in all the countries over this period,
while by 2012 Italy had the highest proportion of women members of
parliament.

The figures for Germany, Italy and France show similar trends. In Germany, the
percentage increased steadily from 33% in 2000 to 37% in 2012. In France,
there was also a steady increase from 25% in 2000 to 32% by the end of the
period. The rise was more significant in Italy, from 27% in 2000 to 34% in 2008
before reaching almost 40% in 2012.

In 2000, the proportion of female members of parliament was just 3% in the

UK, the lowest figure of the five countries. However, there was a dramatic
increase to 20% in 2008 and then to 23% four years later. In contrast, the figure
for Belgium was 17% of women MPs in 2000. This percentage saw a steady
rise to reach a peak of almost 25% in 2008, before falling to 23%, the same
proportion as in the UK, in 2012.

196 words

Dch

Biu ng so snh phn trm cc thnh vin n trong Quc hi cc nc

c, , Php, anh v B trong cc nm t 2000 n 2012.

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 3

Nhn chung, s phn trm cc ngh s n tng tt c cc nc trong giai on
ny, trong khi n 2012 t s phn trm thnh vin Quc hi n cao nht.

S liu cho cc nc c, , Php th hin cc xu hng tng t. c, s

phn trm tng chm t 33% vo nm 2000 n 37% vo nm 2012. Php
cng c mt s tng n nh t 25% vo nm 2000 n 32% n cui giai on.
S tng trng r rng hn, t 27% vo nm 200 n 34% vo nm 2008
trc khi gn t n 40% vo nm 2012.

Vo nm 2000, phn trm s n ngh s ch khong 3% Anh, s liu thp

nht trong nm nc. Tuy nhin, con s tng n 20% nm 2008 v sau l
23% vo bn nm sau . Ngc li, s liu B t 17% nm 2000. S phn
trm ny tng n nh v t nh khong gn 25% vo nm 2008 trc khi
gim xung cn 23% nh Anh vo nm 2012.

II. BAR CHART

V d 12: Film production in 5 countries (11/03/2017)

The chart below shows the percentage of films produced by 5 different
countries in 3 years.

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 4

Report Plan:
Paraphrase introduction
Summary paragraph [1] over the period, percentage of films made
in 3 countries increased [2] the figure for films in the other 2
countries fell slightly.
Paragraph 3 figures for the countries where the percentages
increased B, D and E.
Paragraph 4 figures for the other countries A and C.

The bar chart compares 5 countries in terms of the percentages of films which
they made from 2007 to 2009.

Overall, three of the countries witnessed an increase in the percentage of films

which were produced, while two countries experienced a slight decline in their
figures.
Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 5

The percentage figures for films produced in countries B, D and E all rose
slightly. Country B saw a significant rise from about 34% in 2007 to 50% in
2009. The increases were more modest about 2% - in countries D and E,
reaching 15% and 7% respectively in 2009.

In contrast, there was a slight decline in the figures for countries A and C. The
percentages were highest in country A, but fellsteadily from 80% in 2007 to
76% in 2009. In country C, the figures fluctuated. From 20% in 2007, the
percentage increased slightly the following year, before falling to 19% in 2009.

152 words

Dch

Biu hnh ct so snh 5 t nc v s lng phim sn xut t 2007 n

2009.

Nhn chung, ba trong s cc nc trn chng kin mt s tng trin v s

lng phim c sn xut trong khi s liu ca hai quc gia cn li gim nh.

S phn trm phim c sn xut nc B,D v E u tng nh. Nc B

chng kin mt s tng trng ng k t khong 34% vo nm 2007 n 50%
vo nm 2009. S tng trng nc D v E khim tn hn, khong 2%, ln
lt t n 15% v 7% vo nm 2009.

Ngc li, c mt s gim nh trong s liu cc nc A v C. Nc A c s

phn trm phim cao nht nhng sau t t gim t 80% vo nm 2007
xung cn 70% vo nm 2009. S liu nc C dao ng. T 20% vo nm
2007, s phn trm tng nh vo nm tip theo trc khi tt xung cn 19% vo
nm 2009.

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 6

V d 13: renewable energy of the total supply (15/04/2017)

Report Plan:

paraphrase title using some of your own words

overview paragraph: [1] a much higher percentage of total energy
was supplied by renewables in Norway and Iceland than in the other
two countries [2] Norway and Germany saw an increase in the
proporiton of renewables in each of the 3 years.
Paragraph 3: compare the 2000 figures for the 4 countries
Paragraph 4: compare the trends and figures for the other two years

The bar chart compares four countries in terms of renewable energy as a

proportion of the total supply in three different years.

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 7

Overall, a much higher percentage of total energy was supplied by renewables
in Norway and Iceland than in the other two countries. Norway and Germany
saw an increase in the proportion of renewables to supply energy in each of the
years.

In 2000, renewable energy accounted for 60% of the total supplied in Norway
and 50% in Iceland. In contrast, the figures for Australia and Germany were
both only around 10%.

In Norway, the renewable energy used increased to 65% and almost 80% in
2004 and 2007. There was also a steady increase in the figures in Germany, to
15% in 2004 and then reaching a peak of 18% in 2007. The figures fluctuated
in Iceland and Australia, with the highest percentage of renewable energy
supply recorded in 2004, at about 60% and 10% respectively. These figures
then fell slightly to 55% in Iceland and to just below 10% in Australia.

173 words

Dch

Biu ct so snh phn trm nng lng thay th trn tng ngun cung cp
nng lng ca bn nc trong ba nm khc nhau.

Nhn chung, mt lng phn trm nng lng thay th cao hn nhiu c
s dng bi Norway v Iceland so vi hai nc cn li. Norway v c u
tng v lng phn trm ngun cung cp nng lng thay th trong tng nm.

Vo nm 2000, nng lng thay th chim 60% tng ngun cung nng lng
Norway v 50% Iceland. Ngc li, s liu ca c v c u ch t khong
10%.

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 8

 Norway, s nng lng thay th c s dng tng ln 65% v gn 80% vo
hai nm 2004 v 2007. S liu ca c tng n nh, t n 15% nm 2004 v
chm nh 18% vo nm 2007. S liu ca Iceland v c dao ng, vi lng
nng lng thay th cao nht vo nm 2004 ln lt l 60% v 40%. Nhng con
s ny sau gim nh xung cn 55% Iceland v ch cn 10% c.

V d 14: Population in UK and Wales ( 25/2/2017)

The charts below show population statistics in two countries of the UK from
1700 to 2000.

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 9

Report Plan

Paraphrase paragraph illustrates, compares, England and Wales,

population size, birth and death rates
Summary paragraph population increase: death rate lower than
birth rate

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 10

 Paragraph 3: population size: significant increase, give all 4 years
Paragraph 4: [1] give birth rate for all 4 years [2] similar trend for
death rate give figures for all 4 years.

Report

The first chart illustrates the population size in England and Wales between
1700 and 2000, while the second chart compares the birth and death rates over
the same period.

Overall, the population increased significantly throughout this period. In

contrast, birth and death rates fluctuated, although the annual death rate was
always lower than the birth rate.

The population stood at 5 million in 1700. This figure more than doubled to 11
million in 1800 and by 1900 it had reached 27 million. The population reached
40 million in 2000.

The annual birth rate in 1700 was 30 per one thousand people. There was a rise
to 38 per thousand by 1800. However, the birth rate then declined, and the
same figure of 25 per thousand was recorded for the years 1900 and 2000. The
death rate witnessed a similar fluctuation. In 1700, the death rate was 25 per
thousand and this then rose to reach a peak of 31 per thousand in 1800. The
trend then followed the same pattern as the birth rate. There was a fall to 20 per
thousand in 1900 and a further dramatic fall in 2000 to a figure of 9 per
thousand.

198 words

Dch

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 11

Biu th nht th hin kch c dn s Anh v x Wales vo giai on 1700
v 2000, trong khi biu th hai so snh t l sinh v t trong cng giai
on.

Nhn chung, dn s tng ng k trong giai on ny. Ngc li, t l sinh v t

dao ng mc d t l t lun thp hn t l sinh.

Dn s t 5 triu vo nm 1700. S liu tng gp i ln 11 triu vo nm

1800 v n 1900, con s ln n 27 triu. Dn s t 40 triu vo nm 2000.

T l sinh nm 1700 t 30 trn 1000. Con s tng ln 38 trn 1000 nm 1800.

Tuy nhin, t l sinh sau gim, v t 25 trn 1000 vo c hai nm 1900 v
2000. T l t chng kin mt s dao ng tng t. Vo nm 1700, t l t
t 25 trn 1000 v sau t nh 31 trn 1000 nm 1800. Xu hng sau
ca t l t tng t vi xu hng ca t l sinh. Vo nm 1900 con s gim
xung 20 trn 1000 v sau gim su hn vo nm 2000 xung 9 trn 1000.

V d 15: Government spending on roads and transport (

13/05/17)

The bar chart below shows the percentage of government spending on roads and
transport in 4 countries in the years 1990 1995 2000 2005.

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 12

 Percentage of government spending on road and
trasport
(1990-2005)
30 1990 1995 2000 2005
25

20
Percentage

15

10

0
Italy Portugal UK USA

Report Plan:

Paraphrase paragraph: compares/expenditure/5-year intervals

Summary paragraph: highest figure Portugal; lowest figure the
UK
Paragraph 3: compare and contrast trends and figures Portugal and
Italy
Paragraph 4: compare and contrast trends and figures the UK and
USA.

Report

The chart compares the expenditure of four countries on roads and transport at
five year intervals between 1990 and 2005.

Overall, of these countries Portugal spent the highest proportion of its total
budget on roads and transport. In contrast, over the period the UK government
spent the lowest percentage.

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 13

In 1990, the proportion of spending on roads and transport in Portugal was 27%,
ahead of Italy with 22%. The percentage then declined steadily in Portugal,
falling to 20% in 2005. However, in Italy, the percentages fluctuated. They fell
to 20% in 1995, reached a peak of 23% in 2000 and then fell again by 4% in
2005.

The figures also fluctuated in the UK and the USA, although they were
consistently lower in these two countries when compared with Portugal and
Italy. Over the period, there was a decline in the percentage of government
expenditure on roads and transport in the UK, from 10% in 1990 to 8% in 2005.
In contrast, the percentage rose over the period in the USA, from 11% in 1990
to 15% in 2005.

179 words

Dch

Biu so snh ngn sch ca bn quc gia chi tr cho xy ng ng x v

giao thng vo cc giai on 5 nm t 1990 n 2005.

Nhn chung, B o Nha chi tr s tin cao nht cho ng x v giao thng.
Ngc li, trong giai on chnh ph Anh chi s tin thp nht.

Vo nm 1990, s phn trm ngn sch u t co ng x v giao thng B

o Nha l 27%, i trc Italy vi con s 22%. S phn trm sau gim n
nh xung cn 20% vo 2005. Tuy nhin, , s phn trm dao ng. Con s
gim xung 20% vo nm 1995, t nh 23% vo nm 2000 v tip tc gim
thm 4% vo nm 2005.

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 14

S liu M v Anh dao dng, tuy nhin lun duy tr mc thp hn so vi 2
nc v B o Nha. Trong sut giai on, ph trm ngn sch chnh ph
cho ng x v giao thng gim nh, t 10% nm 1990 xung 8% nm 2005.
Ngc li, t l ny M tng t 11% nm 1990 ln 15% nm 2005.

III. PROCESS

V d 7: ( thi 29/04/2017) Process of waste treatment

Processes of either recycling plastic items to produce goods, or trash into dust
bins to fill land.

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 15

Report Plan:

Paraphrase introduction
Summary paragraph [1] what the processes refer to [2] recycling is
more complicated than landfill
Paragraph 3: landfill: 4 stages. Shop Customers buy plastic goods
and use them - Throw them away in waste bins. Some littering All
plastic goes to landfill sites
Paragraph 4: Recycling: 7 stages. Shop Customers buy and use
plastic goods Take plastic to recycling points for collection Plastic
is sorted in warehouses Transportation Processing plant makes
plastic reusable Returned to shops.

The diagram illustrates the stages involved intwo different methods of dealing
with plastic waste. These stages are dumping in landfill sites or recycling.
Overall, both processes are concerned with the consumption and use of plastic
products. However, recycling is a relatively complex process compared with the
disposal of plastic items in landfill.
Plastic which is not destined for recycling is shown as passing through four
phases. Consumers purchase the plastic goods in a shop and they then use those
goods before they throw them away in waste bins. However, some plastic is
also discarded as litter. All this unwanted plastic eventually ends up in landfill
sites.
Alternatively, plastic items can be reused, and this involves a cycle of seven
stages. Once more, the shop sells plastic products to customers, who then use
them. However, this time they take the used plastic items to a recycling
collecting point, and from there the plastic goes to a warehouse for sorting.
Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 16

Next, trucks transport the sorted plastic goods to an industrial processing plants,
where the plastic is converted into usable forms. The final product then returns
to retail outlets for sale and the cycle begins again.
194 words

Dch
Biu th hin cc bc trong hai phng php x l rc thi t nha. Cc
giai on ny bao gm thi ra bi rc hoc ti ch.
Nhn chung, c hai qu trnh u lin quan n vic tiu dng v s dng cc
sn phm t nha. Tuy nhin, qu trnh ti ch bao gm cc bc kh phc tp
so vi qu trnh thi rc ra bi.
Sn phm t nha khng dng ti ch s tri qua bn giai on. Ngi tiu
dng mua cc sn phm nha trong cc ca hng v sau s dng chng trc
khi vt chng i. Tuy nhin, mt s cc sn phm lm t nha c thi ra
bng vic x rc ba bi. Tt s rc ny u c chuyn n cc bi rc thi.
Thay vo, cc sn phm t nha cng c th c ti s dng, qu trnh ny bao
gm by bc. Mt ln na, cc sn phm nha c bn cho nhng ngi tiu
dng. Tuy nhin ln ny, h s mang nhng sn phm c s dng n cc
im thu thp rc ti ch, t chng c phn loi trong cc nh cha. Tip
theo, cc sn phm nha c phn loi c chuyn n cc nh my x l
bng xe ti vn chuyn, y chng c chuyn ha thnh cc dng sn phm
c th s dng c. Sn phm cui cng mt ln na tr li vi cc ca hng
v chu trnh lp li mt ln na.

Written by Ngoc Bach

Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ieltsngocbach/

Website: www.ngocbach.com Page 17