The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004. Fish and Meat consumption
Sample Response
The provided graph illustrates the consumption of fish and three different kinds of meats in a European country between 1979 and 2004. As a general trend, consumption of fish was lowest between 1979 and 2004 and with time people started eating less lamb and beef and preferred chicken more.
It is shown that the consumption of fish remained almost steady between 1979 and 2004 with an average of 50 grammes per person per week. Fish was less consumed compared to lamb, beef and chicken meats. Consumption of beef was the highest among different kinds of meat in 1979 (above 200 grammes/ week) but people started eating more chicken over the time and in 2004 chicken was the most consumed meat with about 250 gm per person weekly consumption. People ate almost the same amount of lamb in 1979 as they ate chicken which was 150 grammes, but unlike chicken, their liking for lamb decreased and the consumption of lamb declined like beef.
Overall it can be said that in 1979 people ate beef the most and fish the least, and in 2004 chicken became the most eaten meat, fish remained at the bottom with least consumption as always.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use uncountable meat Original: meats Suggested revision: meat Why it matters: “Meat” is uncountable when referring collectively to food types.
- 2. Clarify trend contrast Original: and with time Suggested revision: , while over time Why it matters: “While” clearly contrasts stable low fish consumption with the changing meat trends.
- 3. Use measurable wording Original: preferred chicken more Suggested revision: ate more chicken Why it matters: The graph measures consumption rather than consumer preference.
- 4. Fix comparison form Original: was less consumed compared to Suggested revision: was consumed less than Why it matters: This comparative structure requires “less than.”
- 5. Use standard noun Original: chicken meats Suggested revision: chicken Why it matters: “Chicken” alone names the category shown in the graph.
- 6. Remove extra article Original: over the time Suggested revision: over time Why it matters: The fixed expression for a gradual change is “over time.”
- 7. State unit clearly Original: 250 gm per person weekly consumption Suggested revision: 250 grammes per person per week Why it matters: Use the graph’s complete measurement unit directly after the figure.
- 8. Report measured quantity Original: their liking for lamb Suggested revision: lamb consumption Why it matters: The graph shows quantities eaten and does not measure how much people liked lamb.
- 9. Clarify parallel trend Original: declined like beef Suggested revision: declined, as beef consumption did Why it matters: The revision states the parallel decline more precisely.
- 10. Name chart type Original: provided Suggested revision: line Why it matters: Naming the visual type makes the introduction more precise.
- 11. Describe slight decline Original: almost steady Suggested revision: relatively stable Why it matters: Fish consumption changes only slightly while trending down overall.
- 12. Avoid inferred average Original: with an average of 50 grammes Suggested revision: at around 50 grammes Why it matters: The graph shows values near this level but does not provide a calculated average.
Suggested Rewrites
- meats meat
- and with time , while over time
- preferred chicken more ate more chicken
- was less consumed compared to was consumed less than
- chicken meats chicken
- over the time over time
Why this response received Band 7.0
The response clearly identifies the dominant trends and accurately contrasts the starting and ending positions of all four foods. Its main limitation is that the account relies heavily on endpoints and omits important intermediate fluctuations and crossover points; the highest-priority improvement is to organize the detail around those changes while reducing repetition and correcting several awkward consumption-related expressions.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Achievement
The overview and endpoint comparisons are accurate, and all four series receive relevant coverage.
Add key intermediate features, particularly beef's fluctuations and the point at which chicken overtook it.
Coherence and Cohesion
The response is logically ordered and easy to follow, though the final paragraph largely repeats the opening overview.
Use the final paragraph for an additional comparison or integrate the overview once to avoid repetition.
Lexical Resource
There is sufficient range for describing trends, but several choices, including 'kinds of meats' and 'liking for lamb,' are imprecise or unnatural.
Prefer concise graph language such as 'types of meat,' 'beef consumption,' and 'fell steadily.'
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
Complex and simple structures are generally well controlled, with occasional article, phrasing, and sentence-boundary errors.
Review articles and clause boundaries, especially 'over time' and the comma-linked clauses in the concluding sentence.
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 below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004. Fish and Meat consumption
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.