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

The table 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 shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999. DlV76
In Australia in 1999, various types of indigent broods are shown in persentages by the illustration. First and foremost, the supreme number was sole parents which was 21% and least was aged couples 4% only. Between them (21% - 4%) = 17% difference. Consequently, 232000-48000= 144000 more poor people were sole type rather than aged. Besides, while couples with children were bearing 12%, all households were remaining 11%. There was (12% - 11%)=1% variation. Similarly, couples without children were 1% as swell as single aged persons (couple with no children 7%, single aged person 6%). Furthermore, aged person's(4%) also close to the two types. On the contrary, sole parents (21%) have more part than single, no children (19%) and that was (21% - 19%)= 2%. By the way, 359, 000-232, 000= 127, 000 more indigents for sole pattern. By the keen eyesight, they are vice versa in ratio and the number of destitute. Furthermore, although all households sort have less chunks other than three larger variety's rate like 21%, 19% and 12%, but all households occupied largest chunk of masses. In conclusion, destitute groups were in Australia classified according the family ties were maximum in all households kind in number (1837, 000). In contrast, In the same year, couple with children was the second largest class in case of people (933, 000 people).
In Australia in 1999, various types of indigent broods
are shown
in
Possible spelling mistake found.
persentages
by the illustration.

First
and foremost, the supreme number was
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
sole
parents which was 21% and least was
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
aged
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
couples
4%
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
only
. Between them (21%
Consider using an m-dash if you do not want to join two words.
-
4%) = 17% difference.
Consequently
, 232000-48000= 144000 more poor
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
people
were
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
sole
type
rather
than aged.

Besides
, while
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
couples
with
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
children
were bearing 12%, all
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
households
were remaining 11%. There was (12%
Consider using an m-dash if you do not want to join two words.
-
11%)=1% variation.
Similarly
,
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
couples
without
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
children
were 1% as swell as single
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
aged
persons
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
(couple
with no
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
children
7%, single
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
aged
person 6%).
Furthermore
,
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
aged
person's(4%)
also
close to the two types.
On the contrary
,
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
sole
parents (21%) have more part than single, no
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
children
(19%) and that was (21%
Consider using an m-dash if you do not want to join two words.
-
19%)= 2%. By the way, 359, 000-232, 000= 127, 000 more indigents for
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
sole
pattern. By the keen eyesight, they are vice versa in ratio and the number of destitute.

Furthermore
, although all
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
households
sort have
Did you mean "fewer"? The noun chunks is countable.
less
chunks other than three larger variety's rate like 21%, 19% and 12%,
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
but
all
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
households
occupied largest chunk of masses.

In conclusion
, destitute groups were in Australia classified according the family ties were maximum in all
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
households
A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
kind in number
(1837, 000).
In contrast
, In the same year,
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
couple
with
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
children
was the second largest
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
class
in case of
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
people
(933, 000
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
people
).
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 shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999.

Academic
  American English
5 paragraphs
223 words
5.5
Overall Band Score
Coherence and Cohesion: 5.5
  • 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: 5.5
  • 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: 5.5
  • 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 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.