Band 6+: The bar chart shows the divorce rates in two European countries from 2011 to 2015. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The report adequately addresses the task by summarizing the main trends and making comparisons between the two countries. The overall structure is clear, with an introduction, an overview, and a body paragraph detailing the data. However, there are some inaccuracies in the data (e.g., Finland's 2011 rate is stated as 37% instead of 40%, and Sweden's 2012 rate as 49% instead of 43%). Additionally, the overview could be more precise, as Finland's rates fluctuated rather than rose gradually, and Sweden's rates generally declined but with a peak in 2013. To improve, ensure data accuracy and refine the overview to reflect the overall trends more accurately. The report falls short of the required 150 words.

The report is logically organized with a clear introduction, overview, and body paragraphs. The progression of time is easy to follow, and comparisons between the two countries are made throughout. However, the cohesion could be improved by using a wider range of linking words and referencing devices. For example, the phrase '2 years later' is a bit abrupt; consider using 'Two years on' or 'By 2013' to enhance flow. Additionally, the final sentence could be more smoothly integrated with the preceding one. Overall, the message is clear, but the cohesion is not entirely seamless.

The vocabulary used is appropriate for the task, with terms like 'illustrates', 'gradually', 'decreased', 'reached its highest point', and 'dropped significantly' showing good range. However, there is some repetition and a few imprecise word choices. For instance, 'divorce records' is less precise than 'divorce rates' or 'percentages of divorces'. Also, 'rose gradually' is not accurate for Finland's fluctuating trend; a better phrase might be 'fluctuated overall' or 'showed an upward trend overall'. The phrasing 'in for 5 years' is awkward. To achieve a higher score, aim for more precise and varied vocabulary, such as 'experienced a decline', 'saw a peak', or 'remained relatively stable'. Boost vocabulary complexity to elevate the overall score.

The report demonstrates a reasonable range of grammatical structures, including comparative forms and complex sentences. However, there are several errors that affect clarity and accuracy. The phrase 'in for 5 years' is ungrammatical; it should be 'over a period of 5 years' or 'from 2011 to 2015'. There is also a subject-verb agreement error: 'while it fell down in Sweden' should be 'while it fell in Sweden' (or 'while Sweden's rate fell'). Additionally, the sentence '2 years later' is missing a subject or a proper transition; it should be 'Two years later, in 2013,'. The final sentence 'becoming lower than Finland at the end of the period' is a dangling modifier; it should be 'becoming lower than Finland's rate at the end of the period'. These errors, while not frequent, are noticeable and impact the overall accuracy. To improve, proofread carefully and ensure subject-verb agreement and correct preposition usage.