Do you want to improve your writing? Try our new evaluation service and get detailed feedback.
Check Your Text it's free

The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999. 0R75
The tabulated information shows the percent of poor people from diffent categories living in Australia. The data was taken in the year 1999 and categories were classified in seven family types. The study reveals that majority of familes of all household were living in poverty, with an approx of 11 percent, i. e. 18, 37, 000 candidates. Huge difference was obseved in the case of couples with and without children, the couples with kids were living more poor than couples without kids, with difference of 5 percent, when compared by families of same category. In the case of aged people, a single aged person was living in more poverty than an aged couple, howhever the difference was not much, although it was quite recordable. On similar terms, but with increased numbers, a single person was living in more poverty than a single parent. This study not only reflects the trend of poverty between various family types, but also depects it clearly that living in poverty cannot be completely eleminated by increasing or decreasing the members involved.
The tabulated information
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
shows
the percent of poor
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
people
from
Possible spelling mistake found.
diffent
categories
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
living
in Australia. The data
was taken
in the year 1999 and categories
were classified
in seven family types.

Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Consider rewording the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
The
study reveals that majority of
Possible spelling mistake found.
familes
of all household were
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
living
in
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
poverty
, with an approx of 11 percent,
There should be no space here: "i.e.".
i. e.
18, 37, 000 candidates. Huge difference was
Possible spelling mistake found.
obseved
in the case of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
couples
with and without children, the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
couples
with kids were
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
living
This adjective uses the short comparatives form.
more poor
than
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
couples
without kids, with difference of 5 percent, when compared by families of same category. In the case of aged
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
people
, a single aged person was
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
living
in more
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
poverty
than an aged
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
couple
,
Possible spelling mistake found.
howhever
the difference was not much, although it was quite recordable. On similar terms,
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
but
with increased numbers, a single person was
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
living
in more
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
poverty
than a single parent.

This study not
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
only
reflects the trend of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
poverty
between various family types,
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
but
also
Possible spelling mistake found.
depects
it
clearly
that
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
living
in
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
poverty
cannot be completely
Possible spelling mistake found.
eleminated
by increasing or decreasing the members involved.
What do you think?
  • This is funny writingFunny
  • I love this writingLove
  • This writing has blown my mindWow
  • It made me angryAngry
  • It made me sadSad

IELTS academic The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999.

Academic
  American English
3 paragraphs
176 words
6.0
Overall Band Score
Coherence and Cohesion: 7.0
  • Structure your answers in logical paragraphs
  • ?
    One main idea per paragraph
  • ?
    Include an introduction and conclusion
  • ?
    Support main points with an explanation and then an example
  • Use cohesive linking words accurately and appropriately
  • ?
    Vary your linking phrases using synonyms
Lexical Resource: 5.0
  • Try to vary your vocabulary using accurate synonyms
  • Use less common question specific words that accurately convey meaning
  • Check your work for spelling and word formation mistakes
Grammatical Range: 6.5
  • Use a variety of complex and simple sentences
  • Check your writing for errors
Task Achievement: 5.0
  • Answer all parts of the question
  • ?
    Present relevant ideas
  • Fully explain these ideas
  • ?
    Support ideas with relevant, specific examples
Labels Descriptions
  • ?
    Currently is not available
  • Meet the criteria
  • Doesn't meet the criteria
Recent posts





Get more results for topic:
  • The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.