The graph below shows waste recycling rates in the U.S. from 1960 to 2011.
Sample Response
The given line graph illustrates the information about waste recovery in the United States of America between 1960 and 2011. The data was measured in both million tons and percentages.
Overall, the maximum amount of waste was recovered in 2011, and the minimum was in 1960, while the recycling process increased gradually during the 51 years.
To begin with, 5.6 million tons were recovered in 1960 in the USA, and it increased steadily till 1985 when it was 16.7 million tons. Thereafter, there was a sharply soared and doubled recycling rate in 1990. Also, the enhancement continued in the next five years, where it showed more than 1/5th of the recovery rate. After steadily rising, it ended at 86.9 million tons in 2011.
Shifting the per cent of recycled products initiated at 6.4% in 1960, and from there, it declined slightly to 6.2% next five years. However, it frequently soared till 1985 at 1/10th of the total percentage. At the same time, it up-surged gradually by 6% in the next five years. From 1990 to 2011, it rose drastically and settled at 34.7% 2011.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use precise wording Original: information about waste recovery Suggested revision: data on waste recovery Why it matters: The more direct phrase is clearer and more concise for a chart introduction.
- 2. Correct measurement phrase Original: measured in both million tons and percentages Suggested revision: reported in million tons and as percentages Why it matters: The two series use different units, so the parallel structure needs to distinguish them.
- 3. Use natural collocation Original: maximum Suggested revision: greatest Why it matters: Greatest amount is the more natural collocation for the highest quantity of recovered waste.
- 4. Describe both series Original: the recycling process increased gradually Suggested revision: both measures increased overall Why it matters: The chart shows two measures, and their growth was not consistently gradual throughout the period.
- 5. Use period form Original: during the 51 years Suggested revision: over the 51-year period Why it matters: A compound adjective before a noun uses the singular form and hyphens.
- 6. Use formal time link Original: till Suggested revision: until Why it matters: Until is more appropriate than till in a formal statistical report.
- 7. Improve word order Original: were recovered in 1960 in the USA Suggested revision: were recovered in the USA in 1960 Why it matters: Placing the location before the year makes the sequence easier to read.
- 8. Use trend vocabulary Original: enhancement Suggested revision: increase Why it matters: Enhancement implies an improvement rather than a neutral rise in a measured quantity.
- 9. Use time relative Original: next five years, where Suggested revision: following five years, when Why it matters: When, rather than where, correctly refers to a period of time.
- 10. Clarify sequence Original: from there Suggested revision: after that Why it matters: After that gives a clearer chronological link between the two data points.
- 11. Add time preposition Original: 6.2% next five years Suggested revision: 6.2% over the next five years Why it matters: The duration phrase requires a preposition to show the period over which the decline occurred.
- 12. Avoid exaggerated trend Original: frequently soared Suggested revision: rose gradually Why it matters: The percentage increased in small steps from 1965 to 1985 rather than soaring repeatedly.
Suggested Rewrites
- information about waste recovery data on waste recovery
- measured in both million tons and percentages reported in million tons and as percentages
- maximum greatest
- the recycling process increased gradually both measures increased overall
- during the 51 years over the 51-year period
- till until
Why this response received Band 6.0
The response covers both series and is strongest when reporting several key starting and ending figures alongside the overall upward direction. However, some intermediate descriptions are vague or inaccurately expressed, and the overview does not distinguish the early percentage dip from the later acceleration. Prioritise precise comparisons between the two measures and use straightforward trend language tied to exact years and values.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Achievement
The response identifies the overall rise and reports several accurate figures for both measures, but some intermediate changes and comparisons are unclear or imprecise.
Select the main stages more systematically, including the slight early fall in recycling percentage and the faster growth after 1985, and compare the two series accurately.
Coherence and Cohesion
The paragraphing separates the overview and the two measures clearly, although progression within the detail paragraphs is sometimes weakened by vague references.
Organise each series chronologically and ensure every pronoun or linking phrase refers unambiguously to a specific measure and period.
Lexical Resource
There is sufficient vocabulary for trends and quantities, but frequent awkward collocations such as descriptions of rates soaring or settling reduce precision.
Use conventional chart language such as rose steadily, increased sharply, and reached, avoiding forced synonyms that do not fit the data.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A mix of simple and complex structures communicates the main information, but recurring errors in clause construction, word forms, articles, and prepositions reduce control.
Practise forming complete trend sentences with a clear subject and verb, followed by accurate time and value phrases.
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 waste recycling rates in the U.S. from 1960 to 2011.
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.