IELTS TASK comment and maybe give me the band for this essay)

The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999.
The table compares the percentage of six different types of families enduring poverty in Australia during 1999.
In six kinds of households, it is evident that the poverty rates in single people were by far higher. People with children were also more likely to be poor than those without. The number of elderly people who live in poverty had the lowest proportion in all six groups.

Overall, 11% of Australians or about 1,837,000 people were eduring the poverty in 1999. Poverty rates among aged people were considerably low, with the percentages of 6% for single aged people and 4% for aged couple respectively.

While single parent accounted for 21% poverty rates, only 12% of couple with children were classed as poor. The same pattern can be seen from people without children: whereas 19% single people were living in poverty, the figure for couples was much lower, accounted for 7% respectively.

(151 words)

• 
  
  

Dear roxana, I'd be really appreciated with your helpful advices, and I also have some for u, hope that it is useful, too.
I like the way u use adverbs, but I personally suppose it is quite much than necessary, maybe u can use more compound nouns. One thing more is that u should paraphrase topic vocabularies (poverty = poorness = impoverishment)

Hi, I thought your report was pretty clear. One point you might have mentioned is that even though their percentage was comparatively low, couples with children made up the largest number of poor families with over half of the total number of households in poverty. Here are some other suggestions:

The table below shows the proportion of ...
The table compares the percentage of ...
{these sentences are almost identical - don't repeat ideas like this - I suppose I like the second one better since it includes how many types are shown}

the poverty rates for single people ... {"higher by far" sounds more natural}

had the lowest proportion among the six groups.

were enduring the poverty in 1999.

people were considerably lower, with the percentages

and 4% for aged couples respectively.

While single parent ... {"accounted for" sounds odd in this context - it would be "accounted for 21% of the total", but that is not what the 21% means here} only 12% of couples with children were classified as poor.

The same pattern can be seen for {or "in"} people without children: whereas 19% of single people

... was much lower, amounting to 7% respectively. {the "respectively" doesn't really work here since you are just talking about one number}