The pie charts below give information about world population in 1900 and 2000.
------------------
The pie charts above compare world population in different regions in the year 1900 with the year 2000. It is clear that Asia has maintained its leading position in world population numbers followed by Europe.
In 1900’s world’s population was 1.6 billion, 60% of which was in Asia. Europe’s population (including Russia) was at 25% of the world population, leaving 5% to North America and 3% to other countries.
This can be compared with the data from 2000’s. It indicates that out of 6 billion people living, 54% (including former Soviet Asia) were located in the Asia Pacific. In the second place is Europe (again, including Russia) with 14% of world’s population. However, this time Latin America and Caribbean, the Middle East and North Africa countries surpassed North America, being at 8% and 6% accordingly, while North America’s population remained unchanged at 5%. The rate of population for other countries stayed the same at 3% as well.
In conclusion, the world’s population increased almost 4 times from 1900’s to 2000’s, most of which remained located in Asia. This shows that Asian countries had undergone a tremendous population increase.
First off, I have to note that the category 'Middle East and North Africa' is only present in the 2000 pie chart. Is this intentional? I would also suggest, just for coherence's sake, to order the pie charts chronologically, with 1900 on the left and 2000 on the right.
The pie charts below give information about world population in 1900 and 2000. (As I assume you've been asked to compare population levels, you should refer to this here. Perhaps a better introductory sentence would be 'The following pie charts compare world population levels across various regions between 1900 and 200.
------------------
The pie charts above compare world population in different regions in the year 1900 with the year 2000. It is clear that Asia has maintained its leading position in world population numbers followed by Europe. You've already introduced the pie charts in the very first sentence. I suggest you instead use use an introduction that acts as a nice transition between the information above and your analysis below, such as 'as can be seen from the above charts, Asia has maintained the greatest portion of the world's population, followed by Europe'. I got rid of the term 'world population numbers' as it isn't really proper English. I would also suggest you address the other regions in a brief sentence here, mentioning Africa's population proportional population decrease and the remaining country's maintained percentage of population.
In 1900 the world’s population was 1.6 billion, 60% of which was in Asia. Europe’s population (including Russia) was at 25% of the world population, leaving 5% to North America and 3% to other countries. I would suggest using the word 'comprised' instead of 'was at' - it just sounds better.
This can be compared with the data from 2000’s.Is it from the 2000s or from 2000? It's an important distinction. It indicates that of the 6 billion people living, 54% (including former Soviet Asia) were located in Asia-Pacific. In second place is Europe (again, including Russia) with 14% of world’s population. 'In second place doesn't sound very professional - you could perhaps instead say 'second to Russia came Europe, which accounted for 14% of the world's population.' However, this time Latin America and Caribbean, the Middle East and North Africa countries surpassed North America, being at 8% and 6% accordingly, while North America’s population remained unchanged at 5%. The rate of population for other countries stayed the same at 3% as well.A better structure for this sentence might be to introduce North America as a non-mover then going on to say it was surpassed by Latin America & the Caribbean and the Middle East & North Africa. I would also strongly suggest you mention their population levels in 1900. This is a comparison question - you're being asked to juxtapose the figures from 1900 and 2000. Therefore, you should address the figures from both years. For example, 'in 1900, Latin America & the Caribbean housed 3% of the world's population; by 2000, this figure had risen to 8%.
In conclusion, the world’s population increased almost 4 times from 1900’s to 2000’s, most of which remained located in Asia. This shows that Asian countries had undergone a tremendous population increase. I would suggest a different structure here. Something along the lines of 'in conclusion, one can see that, while the world's population has grown almost four times as large, for the most part people have remained in the same areas.' You could then address where any noteable changes have occurred. I don't understand your conclusion that Asian countries in particular have undergone a population increase, as according to your pie chart, Asia-Pacific has proportionally fewer people living in it than in 1900. Make sure you have your facts right here!
You haven't given the question so I'm unsure what's being asked of you. You have given a very brief overview of changes in population levels - essentially a before and after. Were you asked to give reasons why these changes have occurred? I suggest that in order to improve your mark, you flesh out your answer. A useful structure is S. E. A. (statement, evidence, analysis.) For example, 'Country X's population levels have dramatically increased between years A and B. (statement). While in year A, Country X held _% of the world's population, by year B, this had increased to _% (evidence). From these figures, one can deduce that... (analysis). It's so important to analyse, analyse, analyse - what happened? Why did it happen? How did this affect population figures? Again, I don't know what you were asked to do, but answering these questions will give evidence that you understand the information you are presenting, while fleshing out and adding weight to your answer, which at the moment is very short. I also strongly suggest that you check that all of your information is correct - remember the omission of Middle East and North Africa in the 1900 chart. If you put in that extra effort it should not go unnoticed by your marker.
This is the original question. Forgot to post it: Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. Anyway, I will definitely look into your advices. Thank you for your time and effort, since you have been very helpful my friend
