IELTS TASK 1. Please give me some advice and score of this essay,

[rynana]

The charts give information about the main triggers for the decrease in the productivity in agriculture and its impacts on three regions namely North America, Europe and Oceania in 1990.

It is clear that deforestation and over-grazing were responsible for the degradation of worldwide land. And Europe was the region where the proportion of land degradation was highest.

The percentage of over-grazing accounted for 35% of the reasons that degraded the land, was five times as much as that of the other causes. Triggers by deforestation and over-cultivation that led to land degradation occupied 30% and 28%, respectively.

Europe experienced the percentage of total land degraded by the reasons mentioned above was highest, at 23%. whereas, the proportion of land degradation in North America was the lowest, at only 5%. And the figure for Oceania was at the medium rate, while this region was not affected by over-cultivation.

[Luschen]

Hi Rynana, once again you have the correct format, with a summary paragraph followed by a paragraph about each chart. Still, your descriptions were quite confusing and your wording was often awkward. Overall, I think this would score at a band 5. Here are some specific suggestions:

@rynana

The [two] charts give information about the main triggers for the decrease in the productivity [of areas used for ] agriculture and [their] impacts on three regions[,] namely North America, Europe and Oceania[,] in [the decade of the 1990’s].

It is clear that deforestation and over-grazing were [primarily] responsible for the degradation {or “… were responsible for the lion’s share of the degradation …”} of worldwide land. {or “land across the globe”} [Furthermore,] Europe was the region where the proportion of land degradation was highest[, although each region had its own leading cause of degradation].

The percentage of over-grazing accounted for 35% of the reasons that degraded the land, {this clause sounds very awkward - the percentage due to overgrazing was 35% - saying “the percentage accounted for 35% of the reasons” doesn’t really make sense} was five times as much as that of the other causes. {when you say “the other causes”, I understand it to mean all of the other causes. I would not compare over-grazing to the category labelled other - the important comparison should be to the other named causes. Something like “All three major categories were split fairly equally, with overgrazing ahead of deforestation by 5%, and with over-cultivation close behind at 28% of the total impact.” Then at the end you can say that 7% of the degradation was caused by minor causes grouped together under the label “other”} Triggers by deforestation and over-cultivation that led to land degradation occupied [made up] 30% and 28% [of the worldwide totals], respectively.

[Continuing to the table focusing on specific regions, ]Europe experienced the [highest] percentage of total land degraded by the reasons mentioned above was highest, at 23%[,] whereas, the proportion of land degradation in North America was the lowest, at only 5%. And the figure for Oceania was at the medium rate, while this region was not affected by over-cultivation. {this is the only detail you give about degradation by cause. I would mention that overgrazing was the primary source of degradation in Oceania, while deforestation played the largest role in Europe.}