Let’s start with a few questions.Think carefully about whether the descriptions match what you see in the table or the illustration.
Q1:
” It is noticeable that country with higher literacy rates has higher incomes and long-life expectancy, as well as greater daily calorie intake.”
Q2：
“Additionally, cement alone is not strong enough for building, when water, sand and gravel are mixed with it in specified ratios under room temperature, it becomes concrete suitable for paving and building.”
Q3:
“In the new plan, more housing will be built to accommodate to a rising population. After the redevelopment, the town will be clearer in layout and more convenient for its residents. “
Q4:
“In 2000, about half of Yemen’s population wasis under 14 years old, which is not a health age structure. In contrast, Italy hads a much more reasonable age structure. The middle-aged people are the mainstay, and the older adults exceed the under 14 population. “
If you answered “yes” to all of them, congratulations —— You will not waste your time reading this article. The issue is not accuracy but inference: these statements reflect subjective conclusions that are not directly evidenced by the figure.
” It is noticeable that country with higher literacy rates has higher incomes and long-life expectancy, as well as greater daily calorie intake.”
In Q1, you shouldn’t claim that education causes a country to be healthier. The causality could even run the other way: healthier countries may simply invest more in education. Moreover, health isn’t determined directly or solely by schooling—people can gain knowledge outside school, and many factors (income, nutrition, sanitation, healthcare access) confound the relationship.
What you can say is: “Canada and Japan shows much higher figures across all four indicators than the Peru and Zaire. ” That statement is directly supported by the table.
If you write, “Among the four countries in 1994, the wealthiest country is Japan, with a per-capita income of US$15,760, while the poorest is Zaire, with only US$130,” you might consider it correct—and it is, because the chart reports per-person income. However, in IELTS Writing it’s better to say “Japan has the highest figure at US$15,760 per person, while Zaire has the lowest at US$130.” The word figure avoids value-laden terms like rich or poor, making the description more neutral and objective.
“Additionally, cement alone is not strong enough for building, when water, sand and gravel are mixed with it in specified ratios under room temperature, it becomes concrete suitable for paving and building.“
In Q2, you might think it’s common knowledge that cement is not strong enough for building, and that concrete is mainly used for paving and construction. But you should remember that what you consider “common knowledge” may not be shared by people with different educational or cultural backgrounds. (For example, my foreign teacher couldn’t understand why Chinese children don’t have finance or science courses in school.)
Also, in some building situations, adding water to cement can actually work. So the correct and objective statement is: “Cement alone is not sufficient for making concrete.” That’s the truth.
Likewise, saying “under room temperature” is not scientific. You may think it contrasts with “high temperature,” but room temperature has a specific definition—around 20–25 °C—and it’s not indicated in the picture. It would be more accurate to say “at ambient temperature.”
“15% cement, 10% water, 25% sand and 50% gravel (small stones) are combined at ambient temperature and mixed until homogeneous, producing concrete”
“In the new plan, more housing will be built to accommodate to a rising population. After the redevelopment, the town will be clearer in layout and more convenient for its residents. “
In Q3, It’s the same kind of problem: you can’t really know that the new houses are being built because of population growth. It might also be that people from villages are being relocated and gathered together to live in one area — that’s what the picture actually shows.
You can cleverly change the whole sentence by using just one word: “indicating/hinting at”
“In the new plan, more housing will be built, indicating/hinting at a rising population.“
This way, it only suggests the possibility of population growth rather than asserting it, keeping your description objective and scientific.
Another question is the phrase “convenient for its residents.”
This is a subtle form of personal inference — the picture does not state that the redevelopment is for the convenience of residents. It might simply be part of an urban planning project, such as concentrating development in suburban areas and gathering scattered populations together.
So, the idea of “convenience” is something you’ve unconsciously inferred from everyday experience, not something that is actually shown in the diagram.
“After the redevelopment, the town will be significantly better equipped with urban facilities.” That’s the truth.
“In 2000, about half of Yemen’s population wasis under 14 years old, which is not a health age structure. In contrast, Italy hads a much more reasonable age structure. The middle-aged people are the mainstay, and the older adults exceed the under 14 population. “
In Q4, there are two issues: one is subjective inference, and the other is inaccurate wording.
The first problem is about saying that it is “an unhealthy age structure.” This is not something shown in the chart. You might see that nearly half of the population is under 14 and assume that the working population is small, then jump to the conclusion that the age structure is unhealthy.
But be careful — this kind of assumption can be risky and, in some contexts, even offensive. You should only describe it as a relatively young or relatively old population.
See? Without realizing it, you’ve already brought a lot of your own ideas into the description.
“In 2000, about half of Yemen’s population wasis under 14 years old, making it a relatively young population on the whole. In contrast, Italy hads a much older age structure.” The statement is ok.
The other problem is that “middle-aged people” refers to a specific age range(people aged 40 to 60) — it doesn’t actually cover the 15–59 group shown in the chart.
It’s just like the case with room temperature: when using an English term, you must pay attention to its precise meaning. That’s also why I don’t recommend learning English through Chinese translations — they’re often inaccurate.
Hey, at this point, do you feel a bit uneasy? Even when we think we’re consciously observing our thoughts, at first glance we still tend to judge things through our own value system — our perceptions are deeply colored by subjectivity. This kind of unconscious process is described in a book I’m reading as System 1, while the part that requires deliberate thinking is called System 2. It’s a great book, and I truly recommend it to anyone who, like me, has never received formal training in scientific thinking — I believe it will help you a lot.
I used to trust my feelings, but this book showed me how deceptive they can be. It also reframed my motto—fake it until you make it: don’t let feelings run the show; take action. Noticing the unconscious “System 1” at work can be unsettling at first, but with practice, you’ll find yourself becoming steadily more objective.
(P.S. I’ve always been a procrastinator, but today I just couldn’t help it — I dropped everything I was doing to write this article, because the realization hit me so deeply. I’ve also come to see that writing is purely a product of passion — it comes quickly and fades just as fast. Honestly, I’ll probably lose the motivation to write in a while, but my mild obsession with not leaving things half-done is what pushed me to finish it. I hope you enjoy reading this piece.)