Department and Online Stores in Australia in 2011

The response addresses the task with an overview and data for both store types, but it reports inaccurate values (4% and 6% instead of 0.4% and 0.6%, 13500 instead of 13400 million AUD) and omits the million-AUD unit, which weakens data accuracy.

The response is organised into a clear overview and category-based paragraphs with generally workable progression, though repeated linking like 'Furthermore' and some awkward transitions reduce cohesion.

Vocabulary is adequate but limited and at times imprecise, with errors such as 'the yielded table', 'average profile' for profit, and 'more 700AUS' instead of a correct comparative phrase.

A range of sentence structures is attempted with mostly understandable meaning, but recurring errors, such as 'far more than department stores on account of 368' and run-on phrasing around profit, show imperfect grammatical control.

The response covers all four table categories with accurate figures and a clear overview of the main contrasts. It is slightly below 150 words, and describing the 67 businesses as physical locations confuses the unit being counted.

Ideas progress logically from overview to individual data points with appropriate cohesive devices such as 'Overall', 'However', and 'Lastly', though linking within body paragraphs remains somewhat mechanical.

Vocabulary supports clear comparisons, including 'prevalent' and 'a slight advantage'. Precision is less consistent in 'purchase-related data', 'online purchases' and 'online income', which blur the measures or entities being compared.

A wide range of structures is used with flexibility and accuracy, including complex comparative and concessive sentences, with only rare minor slips that do not impede meaning.

The response covers all four measures with a clear comparative overview and mostly accurate figures. However, wider coverage is not established by business counts, and reporting the department-store count directly would make the comparison more precise.

Ideas are organised logically by category with effective linking devices such as 'regarding' and 'in terms of', giving a clear and coherent progression.

Vocabulary includes effective comparisons such as outnumbered and brought in, but wider coverage overstates the business-count evidence, mildly more profitable is less precise than a total-profit comparison, and applied for uses the wrong preposition.

A range of complex structures, including relative and comparative clauses, is used with generally good control, though a few phrasings like 'one-sixth of their total stores' count' are slightly awkward.

The response covers the main measures and gives a comparative overview, but it counts four indicators as six, understates the profit difference by AUD 10 million, and introduces profit under a sales-revenue label. The growth difference also needs percentage-point units.

Ideas progress logically from overview to detail with effective linking phrases like 'In terms of' and 'A similar pattern is evident', though the mislabelled data slightly disrupts clarity.

There is useful comparative language, including a slight edge, but some expressions lack precision. Sixfold higher is ambiguous, a 0.2% margin needs percentage-point units, and physical stores and traditional retailing broaden the department-store category.

A good range of structures is used with confident comparisons, passive voice, and relative clauses, and errors are rare and non-impeding.