The line graph shows the projected population growth of China and India.
Sample Response
The line graph depicts the projected population growth of China and India. The X-axis depicts the year and Y-axis depicts the population in billions. The dotted line depicts the trend for China whereas the solid line depicts the population for India. In the initial phase of 1990, there was a huge difference in the population of India and China. In the subsequent years both the countries saw a steady increase in the population. Though India had a maximum of 1.6 billion populations compared to 1.45 billion of China. There was also an interesting trend in the increase of China's population. It is projected that it will start declining after 2030 after a steady increase till the same year.
The two lines depicting the population of both the countries intersect each other in 2030 which implies that the population remained same during this year. The lowest population that India and China encountered was in 1990 though the number was much higher for China. The highest population will be noticed in 2050 for India and 2030 for China. Overall India saw a more serious increase in population and trends show that it will have difficulty in controlling it whereas China will show a positive trend after 2030 by showing a decline in population.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Repetition Original: depicts Suggested revision: shows Why it matters: Avoid repeating “depicts” in consecutive sentences.
- 2. Line description Original: dotted line depicts the trend for China Suggested revision: dotted line represents China Why it matters: Use “represents” for a graph key.
- 3. Overstatement Original: huge difference Suggested revision: clear difference Why it matters: The gap in 1990 is significant but should be described neutrally.
- 4. Article use Original: both the countries Suggested revision: both countries Why it matters: Do not use “the” in this phrase.
- 5. Countability Original: 1.6 billion populations Suggested revision: a population of 1.6 billion Why it matters: Use “population” as a singular total.
- 6. Clearer comparison Original: compared to 1.45 billion of China Suggested revision: compared with China’s 1.45 billion Why it matters: This is a clearer comparative phrase.
- 7. Formal phrasing Original: till the same year Suggested revision: until that year Why it matters: Use “until” in formal writing.
- 8. Concise verb Original: intersect each other Suggested revision: intersect Why it matters: “Each other” is unnecessary after “intersect”.
- 9. Missing article Original: remained same Suggested revision: remained the same Why it matters: Use “the same” after “remain”.
- 10. Unsupported claim Original: difficulty in controlling it Suggested revision: a continuing upward trend Why it matters: Do not speculate about policy or social difficulty; describe the graph only.
- 11. Sentence rewrite Original: Though India had a maximum of 1.6 billion populations compared to 1.45 billion of China. Suggested revision: India is projected to reach about 1.6 billion by 2050, compared with China’s peak of roughly 1.45 billion around 2030. Why it matters: The original is a sentence fragment and uses “populations” incorrectly.
- 12. Sentence rewrite Original: In the initial phase of 1990, there was a huge difference in the population of India and China. Suggested revision: In 1990, China’s population was about 1.15 billion, compared with approximately 0.85 billion in India. Why it matters: Actual values make the early comparison more precise.
Suggested Rewrites
- depicts shows
- dotted line depicts the trend for China dotted line represents China
- huge difference clear difference
- both the countries both countries
- 1.6 billion populations a population of 1.6 billion
- compared to 1.45 billion of China compared with China’s 1.45 billion
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Detailed feedback by IELTS writing criterion after the annotated essay.
Task Achievement
The report captures the core trend: India rises throughout, China rises then declines slightly, and the two lines meet around 2030. It loses marks for unsupported commentary about population control, vague early comparisons, and some awkward interpretation of maxima.
Keep the overview factual and add approximate values at 1990, 2030, and 2050 without speculating about social consequences.
Coherence and Cohesion
The response has two paragraphs and generally follows the graph chronologically, but some overview information appears late and the order is a little repetitive.
Start with a concise overview, then describe 1990-2030 and 2030-2050 in separate phases.
Lexical Resource
Vocabulary is adequate but repetitive around “depicts” and “population”, and some collocations are inaccurate.
Use “stood at”, “is projected to”, “overtake”, “peak”, “decline”, and “reach” for clearer graph description.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
Grammar errors include fragments, article problems, and plural/countability errors, but they rarely block meaning.
Check sentence boundaries and use “a population of” or “people”, not “populations”, when referring to a country’s total.