The chart below shows the changes that took place in three different areas of crime in Panama City from 2010 to 2019.
Sample Response
The evolution in the various types of crime in the city of Panama between 2010 and 2019 is rendered by the chart. The data is calibrated in the number of events per year.
To begin with, In 2010, Burglary was the highest in terms of number with around 3400 events. In a subsequent year, A slight rise of about 3800 cases was observed. Further, The rate of Burglary was declined drastically to only 1000 complaints by 2015. Then over a year, a small jump was seen nearly to 1500, but in the following years there was no noticeable change had occurred.
A considerable drop was noticed in the case of car theft from well above 2500 in 2010 to just above 2000 in 2013. Over the next six years, The events of car theft increased steadily from slight over 2000 to roughly 2800.
It is a noteworthy point that there had been no difference seen for robbery in a decade over the time; it showed fluctuating behaviour in the pattern of robberies.
Overall, It is evident that there was a significant slip was happened for Burglary, but in the other two cases of offence, no clear shift did see and stayed bounded in a particular range. By 2019, car theft become a highly offensive activity.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use chart wording Original: The data is calibrated in Suggested revision: The data is presented as Why it matters: 'Presented as' accurately describes the chart's measurement, whereas 'calibrated in' is unnatural here.
- 2. Fix capitalization Original: In Suggested revision: in Why it matters: A word following a comma within the same sentence should not be capitalized.
- 3. Fix comparison structure Original: Burglary was the highest in terms of number Suggested revision: burglary had the highest number of incidents Why it matters: The revision supplies the correct subject-verb structure for comparing incident totals.
- 4. Make sequence precise Original: In a subsequent year Suggested revision: In the following year Why it matters: The chart shows that the rise occurred specifically in 2011, immediately after 2010.
- 5. Correct peak value Original: A slight rise of about 3800 cases Suggested revision: A slight rise to about 3,700 cases Why it matters: The burglary line peaks at approximately 3,700 incidents in 2011, and a rise is expressed with 'to'.
- 6. Name the figure clearly Original: Further, The rate of Burglary Suggested revision: The burglary figure Why it matters: The chart reports incident numbers rather than a rate, and the mid-sentence capitalization is incorrect.
- 7. Remove passive form Original: was declined Suggested revision: declined Why it matters: 'Decline' is intransitive in this context and cannot take the passive form.
- 8. Match chart measure Original: 1000 complaints Suggested revision: 1,000 incidents Why it matters: The vertical axis counts incidents, not complaints.
- 9. Clarify time sequence Original: Then over a year Suggested revision: Over the following year Why it matters: This wording clearly links the movement from 2015 to 2016.
- 10. Fix adverb placement Original: was seen nearly to 1500 Suggested revision: was seen to nearly 1,500 Why it matters: 'Nearly' should modify the value rather than the direction preposition.
- 11. Remove double verb Original: there was no noticeable change had occurred Suggested revision: no noticeable change occurred Why it matters: The sentence incorrectly combines two finite verb constructions for the same clause.
- 12. Report value precisely Original: from well above 2500 in 2010 Suggested revision: from about 2,800 in 2010 Why it matters: The car-theft series begins at approximately 2,800 incidents.
Suggested Rewrites
- The data is calibrated in The data is presented as
- In in
- Burglary was the highest in terms of number burglary had the highest number of incidents
- In a subsequent year In the following year
- A slight rise of about 3800 cases A slight rise to about 3,700 cases
- Further, The rate of Burglary The burglary figure
Why this response received Band 6.0
The response identifies the dominant trends and supports the burglary and car-theft descriptions with several broadly accurate figures. The weakest area is the treatment of robbery, which is both underdeveloped and described contradictorily, while frequent malformed verb structures make the report less polished. Prioritize a precise overview and fuller comparison of all three series, then simplify sentences to eliminate double passives and faulty verb forms.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Achievement
The main burglary decline and car-theft recovery are adequately reported, but robbery is barely developed and the claim of no difference conflicts with its fluctuations.
Summarize all three lines accurately, noting that robbery remained the lowest while car theft finished highest and burglary fell substantially overall.
Coherence and Cohesion
The report progresses logically through the three crime types and ends with an overview, though some paragraphs are uneven and linking is mechanical.
Place the overview immediately after the introduction and combine related trend details into balanced comparison paragraphs.
Lexical Resource
The response uses a reasonable range of trend vocabulary, but several collocations are inaccurate or unnatural, including “data is calibrated” and “highly offensive activity.”
Use precise chart language such as “incidents,” “fell sharply,” “remained within a narrow range,” and “was the most common crime.”
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
Meaning remains generally clear, but frequent errors in capitalization, verb forms, and double-passive constructions reduce grammatical control.
Rewrite clauses such as “was declined” and “there was a significant slip was happened” with one correct finite verb.
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 chart below shows the changes that took place in three different areas of crime in Panama City from 2010 to 2019.
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.