Band 7+: The charts below show degrees granted in different fields at the National University in the years 1990, 2000, and 2010. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The report effectively addresses the task by providing an overview and describing the main trends across the three years. The overall structure is clear, with an introduction, an overview, and detailed paragraphs. However, there are a few minor inaccuracies and omissions: the statement that law and medicine 'returned to its former figures in 2010' is not entirely accurate, as law returned to 15% but medicine did not (it was 25% in both 1990 and 2010, so that part is correct, but the phrasing could be clearer). Additionally, the final paragraph mentions that law increased by 5% from 2000 to 2010, which is correct, but it does not explicitly state that computer science increased from 40% to 45%, which is a key feature. The report could also improve by using more precise language and avoiding minor grammatical issues (e.g., 'compares' should be 'compare', 'made up for' should be 'accounted for'). Overall, the response is well-organized and covers the main features, but a few lapses in accuracy and clarity prevent it from achieving a higher score.

The report is logically organized with a clear overall statement and a chronological description of the data. Paragraphing is appropriate, and the use of cohesive devices such as 'Overall', 'By contrast', and 'In contrast' helps the reader follow the progression. However, there are minor lapses in cohesion, such as the phrase 'with both experienced an increase' which disrupts the flow. To improve, ensure that each paragraph has a clear central idea and that transitions between sentences are smooth and accurate.

The report uses a good range of vocabulary appropriate for the task, including 'accounted for', 'experienced a decline', and 'handed out'. There is some repetition of phrases like 'degrees granted' and 'handed out', and a few awkward expressions such as 'made up for' (should be 'made up') and 'became second place' (should be 'ranked second'). To achieve a higher score, aim for more precise and varied vocabulary, and avoid informal or imprecise terms. Pay attention to vocabulary repetition to improve the overall score.

The report demonstrates an attempt to use a range of sentence structures, but there are several grammatical errors that affect clarity. For example, 'The pie charts below compares' should be 'compare', 'degrees in computer science increased' is fine but 'graduates in law and medicine programs dipped... before returning to its former figures' has a subject-verb agreement issue ('its' should be 'their'). Additionally, 'In 2010, computer science and law became degrees become more common' is a garbled sentence that needs correction. To improve, focus on subject-verb agreement, correct use of relative clauses, and proofreading for clarity.