PIE CHARTS

INTRODUCTION
Paraphrase the information given by IELTS
 S + introduction verb + Noun Phrase + Relative clause
 S + introduction Verb + Noun clause
Note: 2 or more pie charts in one task
Put all the pie charts together as a subject.
Ex: The pie charts compare …
Separate the pie charts from each other + conjunction ‘while’ or
‘whereas’
Ex: The first pie chart illustrates … whereas the second one
represents …
The pie charts below give information about the composition of
household rubbish in the United Kingdom in two different years.
 The given pie charts illustrate the percentage of domestic waste
which was produced (from 8 different sources) in the UK in two years
(1985 and 2002)
 OVERVIEW
WHAT:
- Key features of each pie chart (the biggest/ the smallest part)
- Similarities or differences among pie charts.
- Note: pie charts changing during the period of time: general trend.

HOW: Recommended structures:

- … accounted for the largest proportion/ portion/ share/ percentage
while the opposite was true for …
- … accounted for the smallest/ the biggest proportion/ portion/ share/
percentage in both/ three years surveyed.
- … was the most/ least popular … (reason/ place/ kind of job…)
whereas ….
- There was a rise/ decrease in the proportion of … while ….
experienced a fall/ an increase/ remained (almost) unchanged.
 OVERVIEW
The percentage of world forest in 5 dif-
ferent regions The percentage of timber in each
region
South Amer-
North ica 16% South
America America
25% North 23%
America
30%

Africa
Africa 9%
27%
Europe
18%

Europe Asia 18%

Asia 20%
14%

Overall, Asia accounts for the smallest portion of worldwide forest while
the largest share is seen in Africa where there is the least amount of
timber in the world.
 OVERVIEW
HoHouse hold rubbis h 2002d Rubbis h
HOUS EHOLD RUBBIS H 1 9 8 5 1985d Rubbis h 1985
Kitchen/ Kitchen/
Organic Organic Metal
Paper waste Paper 4%
waste 36%
28% 44% 16%

Glass Miscellaneous
7% 17%

Textiles Metal
3% 6% Wood
6%

Plastic
7%
Glass
4%
Wood Dust and cinders Textiles Plastic
5% 8% 2% 7%

Overall, waste from textiles accounted for the smallest portion in both years
(while the biggest share of household rubbish was produced from paper in
1985 and from kitchen/ organic waste in 2002). In addition, the proportions of
most types of domestic rubbish remained almost unchanged except a soar in
kitchen/ organic waste, a plummet in paper waste and a replacement of dust
and cinders with miscellaneous.
 BODY PARAGRAPHS
 Divided paragraphs by each pie chart (different topics) or
categories (the same topic).
 Detailed information: time + information + data
 Comparison with other categories in the same chart or with the
same category in different charts.
 Variety of languages and structures
 BODY PARAGRAPHS
RECOMMENDED STRUCTURES:
 To list the data:
A. (number) of (factor) + verb…
Ex: 30% of the women smoked in 2015.
B. The proportion/ percentage/ number/ amount of (category) was
(number)
Ex: The percentage of the smoking women was 30% in 2015.
C. (Factor) made up/ constituted, accounted for (number)
Ex: The women who smoked made up 30% in 2015
D. There + be + (number) of (category)
Ex: There were 30% of the females smoking in 2015.
 BODY PARAGRAPHS
 To make comparisons:
 A, B, C, or D structure, as opposed to/ compared to/ in comparison with +
data of another factor in the graphic.
Ex: In 2015, 30% of the women smoked, as opposed to 50% of the
smoking males.
 A, B, C, or D structure, as opposed to/ compared to/ in comparison with +
data + which was seen in + another factor.
Ex: in 2015, female smokers accounted for 30%, compared to 50% which
was seen in male smokers.
 A, B, C, or D structure, which was + superlative/ comparative/ as … as +
another factor
Ex: There were 30% smoking females in 2015, which was lower than the
proportion of male smokers (50%)
 A, B, C, or D structure + while/ whereas + A, B, C, or D structure
Ex: The proportion of female smokers was 30% while smoking men accounted
for 50%.
 BODY PARAGRAPHS
HoHouse hold rubbis h 2002d Rubbis h
HOUS EHOLD RUBBIS H 1 9 8 5 1985d Rubbis h 1985
Kitchen/ Kitchen/
Organic Organic Metal
Paper waste Paper 4%
waste 36%
28% 44% 16%

Glass Miscellaneous
7% 17%

Textiles Metal
3% 6% Wood
6%

Plastic
7%
Glass
4%
Wood Dust and cinders Textiles Plastic
5% 8% 2% 7%

 Body paragraph 1: Kitchen/ organic waste Vs. Paper (in both pie charts)
 Body paragraph 2: Miscellaneous Vs. Dust and cinders + Plastic
 Body paragraph 3: the remaining categories (mild fluctuation in their
composition, ranging from 1% to 3%)
 BODY PARAGRAPHS
HoHouse hold rubbis h 2002d Rubbis h
HOUS EHOLD RUBBIS H 1 9 8 5 1985d Rubbis h 1985
Kitchen/ Kitchen/
Organic Organic Metal
Paper waste Paper 4%
waste 36%
28% 44% 16%

Glass Miscellaneous
7% 17%

Textiles Metal
3% 6% Wood
6%

Plastic
7%
Glass
4%
Wood Dust and cinders Textiles Plastic
5% 8% 2% 7%

In 1985, paper waste made up the largest percentage, at 36% which

significantly decreased by 20% in 2002. In contrast, there was a marked
growth in the proportion of kitchen/ organic waste, from 28% in 1985 to 44% in
2002, making it the most popular kind of waste at that time.
 BODY PARAGRAPHS
HoHouse hold rubbis h 2002d Rubbis h
HOUS EHOLD RUBBIS H 1 9 8 5 1985d Rubbis h 1985
Kitchen/ Kitchen/
Organic Organic Metal
Paper waste Paper 4%
waste 36%
28% 44% 16%

Glass Miscellaneous
7% 17%

Textiles Metal
3% 6% Wood
6%

Plastic
7%
Glass
4%
Wood Dust and cinders Textiles Plastic
5% 8% 2% 7%

Ranked third, there was 8% waste from dust and cinders in 1985 which was
replaced with miscellaneous in 2002, constituting 17% of the total. In addition,
plastic saw a plateau at 7% in the share of household waste in both years.
 BODY PARAGRAPHS
HoHouse hold rubbis h 2002d Rubbis h
HOUS EHOLD RUBBIS H 1 9 8 5 1985d Rubbis h 1985
Kitchen/ Kitchen/
Organic Organic Metal
Paper waste Paper 4%
waste 36%
28% 44% 16%

Glass Miscellaneous
7% 17%

Textiles Metal
3% 6% Wood
6%

Plastic
7%
Glass
4%
Wood Dust and cinders Textiles Plastic
5% 8% 2% 7%

In terms of the domestic waste produced by glass, textiles, metal and

wood, their proportions mildly fluctuated by between 1% and 3%, with a
marginal rise for wood and a slight drop for the remaining sources of
waste.