The graph shows the average annual expenditure on cell phones and residential phone services.
Sample Response
The line graph illustrates the amount of money spent on mobile and residential phone services yearly within a given decade(from 2001 to 2010) in the US as conducted by the Bureau of labour services. From the image, it is immediately apparent that the use of cell phones surged as the years went by, while that of home phones became unpopular, as evidenced by the income generated.
In the beginning year 2001, 200 dollars was spent on mobile phones compared to 700dollars on resident phones, indicating that mobile phones were not in massive use then. However, the narrative changed in 2002 as consumers started becoming accustomed to cell phones and residential phones took a plummeting turn.
By the year 2006, according to the survey, mobile phone service returns were seen to have reached the same level as home phones which was about 550dollars at that time.
After that year, the income from residential phone services kept on with the steady decline whilst that of mobile inflated.
Lastly, hypothetically, by the end of 2010, due to the popular use of cell phone services, its expenditure reached 750dollars while residential phones significantly declined to 300 dollars.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use concise timeframe Original: yearly within a given decade Suggested revision: annually over the decade Why it matters: This phrasing states the reporting period more naturally and precisely.
- 2. Correct source phrasing Original: as conducted by Suggested revision: using data from Why it matters: A graph is based on data from an organisation rather than conducted by it.
- 3. Name source accurately Original: Bureau of labour services Suggested revision: Bureau of Labor Statistics Why it matters: The chart identifies the source as the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
- 4. Describe measured variable Original: the use of cell phones surged Suggested revision: spending on cell phone services rose sharply Why it matters: The graph measures expenditure rather than the level of phone use.
- 5. Avoid unsupported inference Original: that of home phones became unpopular Suggested revision: spending on residential phone services declined Why it matters: Falling expenditure does not directly establish that home phones became unpopular.
- 6. Use expenditure term Original: the income generated Suggested revision: the expenditure recorded Why it matters: The chart reports consumer expenditure, not income generated by the services.
- 7. Simplify time reference Original: In the beginning year 2001 Suggested revision: In 2001 Why it matters: The shorter form is the natural way to introduce the first year.
- 8. Format currency clearly Original: 700dollars Suggested revision: $700 Why it matters: A currency symbol presents the chart value more clearly and concisely.
- 9. Use correct term Original: resident phones Suggested revision: residential phone services Why it matters: Residential phone services is the category named in the chart.
- 10. Report expenditure only Original: mobile phones were not in massive use then Suggested revision: spending on mobile phone services was much lower Why it matters: The visual supports a comparison of spending, not a claim about how widely phones were used.
- 11. Use analytical wording Original: narrative Suggested revision: trend Why it matters: Trend is more precise than narrative when describing graph movements.
- 12. Remove inferred cause Original: consumers started becoming accustomed to cell phones Suggested revision: spending on cell phone services started to rise Why it matters: The graph shows rising expenditure but gives no evidence about consumer familiarity.
Suggested Rewrites
- yearly within a given decade annually over the decade
- as conducted by using data from
- Bureau of labour services Bureau of Labor Statistics
- the use of cell phones surged spending on cell phone services rose sharply
- that of home phones became unpopular spending on residential phone services declined
- the income generated the expenditure recorded
Why this response received Band 6.0
The response identifies the two opposing trends and includes useful figures for the starting point and crossover, while its generally clear organisation makes the account easy to follow. Its main limitation is incomplete and occasionally inaccurate selection, especially the claim that residential-phone spending fell to $300 in 2010 when the graph shows about $400. Prioritise precise units, endpoints, and comparisons drawn directly from the graph.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Achievement
A clear overview and several relevant figures address the task, but the final residential-phone value is inaccurate and coverage of intermediate changes is limited.
Report the 2010 residential figure as about $400 and support the overview with two or three precise comparisons across the period.
Coherence and Cohesion
The account follows a logical chronological sequence, although excessive short paragraphs and some vague referencing make progression less smooth.
Group related years into two developed detail paragraphs and use explicit references to each service instead of vague forms such as 'that of mobile'.
Lexical Resource
There is sufficient vocabulary for describing trends, but several choices such as 'income', 'returns', and 'inflated' misrepresent expenditure data.
Use precise trend language such as 'spending rose', 'expenditure fell', and 'the figures converged' consistently.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A mix of simple and complex structures generally communicates the comparisons, despite recurring article, spacing, punctuation, and phrasing errors.
Proofread sentence boundaries, articles, and noun phrases, especially forms such as '$700', 'residential phones', and 'annual expenditure'.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Academic Writing Task 1
The graph shows the average annual expenditure on cell phones and residential phone services.
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.