WRITING 8 – REVISION (1)

WRITING TASK 1
1) Mixed charts
The graphs below show the unemployment rate of citizens in the US with a further
classification displaying average salary per week in 2005.

Introduction: The chart 1 gives information about …., while the chart 2 illustrates ….
Overview: [Overview 1] + [Overview 2]
Body 1 - Chart 1
Body 2 - Chart 2

The table gives information about average weekly earnings of US citizens across seven
levels of education in 2005, while the bar chart illustrates their unemployment levels in the
same year.
#: subject / time
=/=: earnings / unemployment

Formula: The provided charts give information about (#), in terms of ___ and ____
⇒ The provided charts give information about US citizens across seven levels of education
in 2005, in terms of weekly earnings and unemployment.

Overall, the higher the level of education, the lower the unemployment rate and the higher
the weekly income, with the exception of professional degree holders, who made slightly
higher than those having a doctoral degree.

Looking first at average earnings per week, individuals with professional degrees topped
the chart with an average of $1,800, preceding/ followed by/ trailed by/ slightly ahead
of PhD holders, who earned $1,740. The amounts of money that master’s and bachelor’s
degree holders made on a weekly basis were lower, with respective figures of $1,560 and
$1,246. As for non-degree holders, weekly earnings varied significantly, with those
without a high school diploma earning as little as $538, which was the lowest pay rate in
the survey. Meanwhile, high school graduates and individuals with some college education
made an average of $701 and $840 per week, respectively.

Turning to unemployment/ joblessness, the highest rate (8%) was observed in the
demographic/ cohort/ group of those not having a high school diploma. Trailing behind,
unemployment levels of adults with a high school diploma and some college education
stood at approximately 5.7% and 4.3%, in that order. Bachelor’s and master’s degree
holders faced roughly similar unemployment rates, both at just under/ shy of/ south of
3%. Finally, those at the apex of academic qualification, individuals with a professional or
doctoral degree, were the least susceptible to joblessness, with only 1.5% of them being
classified as out of work.
VER 2
The provided charts show the correlation between the educational attainment level and
two factors, namely unemployment and average weekly earnings, among US citizens in
2005.

Overall, the data indicates a clear inverse relationship between education level and
unemployment, and a direct relationship between education and weekly earnings.

Those at the apex of academic qualification, individuals with a professional or doctoral

degree, enjoyed the highest earnings and the lowest unemployment rate. It is noteworthy
that despite sharing the same unemployment rate of 1.5%, the earnings of professionals,
averaging $1,800 per week, outpaced those of doctoral degree holders who earned
around $1,740.

As for people with middle-tier qualifications, namely a master’s degree and a bachelor’s
degree, the former saw average weekly earnings of $1,560, and 2.5% were out of work,
while the corresponding figures for the latter were $1,246 and nearly 3%, respectively.

In contrast, citizens with lower educational qualifications observed a different scenario.

Individuals without a high school diploma exhibited the highest unemployment rate of
around 8%, and earned only $538 each week, which was the lowest pay rate in the year
surveyed. As for those with some college education and high school graduates, they earned
$840 and $701 per week and faced unemployment levels of about 4.3% and 5.7%, in that
order.
 2) Dynamic chart (Future predictions)

The line graph compares the proportion of city dwellers in the Philippines, Thailand,
Malaysia, and Indonesia between 1970 and 2020, as well as giving predictions for the years
2030 and 2040.

Overall, if predictions/ projections/ forecasts are correct, all examined countries will
witness their urban populations increasing markedly / significantly, with Indonesia
registering the most pronounced growth, although this country initially had the lowest
figure. [TREND + DIFFERENCE(S)]

Looking first at the Philippines and Malaysia, the former had about 32% of its population
residing / living in cities, slightly ahead of the figure for the latter. Thereafter, the
Malaysian urban demographic increased steadily, officially overtaking that of the
Philippines from 1991 onwards. This increasing trend is predicted to continue until 2040,
at which point it is estimated that 85% of the Malaysian population will be living in urban
areas/ settings. Unlike Malaysia whose pattern is consistent, the Philippines shows some
fluctuations. After reaching about 50%, the proportion of city residents in this country fell
by around 10% in 2010. This trend, nevertheless, was short-lived, because it was followed
by a recovery to 45% in 2020. Predictions show that the urban population of the
Philippines will continue rising to reach just north of 50% by 2040. Notwithstanding this
recovery, this country is still forecast(ed) to fall from first to third place in the chart.

Turning to the remaining nations, it is notable that the trajectory observed in Indonesia
mirrors the one seen in Malaysia. Albeit with the lowest starting point of about 12%,
Indonesia showed rapid rises in urban demographic, surpassing Thailand since 2000 and
the Philippines since 2010. Indonesia is projected / anticipated/ expected to become the
country with the second highest urban population, with figures of around 60% for 2030
and 2040, up from 50% in 2020. Finally, Thailand generally displays the lowest figures,
leaving aside the period from 1970 to 2000. Commencing at nearly 20%, its urban cohort
had increased to just shy of 30% by 1990, and it leveled off there until 2020. Interestingly,
this demographic will reportedly / likely/ expectedly have surged to roughly 40% by 2030
and further 45% by 2040. Still, this growth seems insufficient to grant this country a higher
position in the graph.
WRITING TASK 2
HW: Rewrite (Deadline 31/1)
Some people say that too much attention and resources have been spent to protect
wild animals and birds.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Too much - more than necessary
Not too much
+ Importance
+ Not even enough

Sample
Wildlife protection has been a subject of debate as of late, with some arguing that too much
has been spent on this cause. I stand in opposition to this view, firmly believing that the
investment in wildlife conservation is not only necessary but also immensely beneficial.

Understanding the critical role of wildlife in maintaining biodiversity is the cornerstone of

this argument. Every species, no matter how small, plays a crucial role in its ecosystem. The
disappearance of a single species can set off a domino effect, disrupting the delicate balance
of nature. For example, the extinction of a single predator can lead to an overpopulation of
its prey, thereby disrupting the entire food chain. Additionally, numerous species hold
untapped medicinal value and are indispensable for ongoing scientific research and
pharmaceutical development.

The argument in favor of wildlife conservation is further strengthened by its role in

ensuring sustainable development. It is a misconception that economic development and
environmental protection are mutually exclusive. In fact, a healthy ecosystem contributes
significantly to the economy, particularly through tourism. National parks and wildlife
reserves, for example, are not just conservation hubs but also major tourist attractions,
drawing millions of visitors annually. Not only does this tourism bring in substantial
revenue, but it also creates numerous job opportunities.
In conclusion, for the reasons elaborated above, I am convinced that the resources
dedicated to preserving wildlife are justified. The benefits of protecting wild animals and
birds are manifold, extending beyond the immediate environmental impact to substantial
economic gains.
Word count: 251