Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-09-19

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The chart below shows how frequently people in the USA ate in fast food restaurants between 2003 and 2013.

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

 

Student answer (Band 5.0)

The graph provides information about the number of people who lives in usa and eat in fast food restaurants from 2003 to 2013. Overall,2006 and 2013 was dominanat years which people more used fast food restaurents for those eat.They were shows some flucatutions.In 2003,peoples were less used junk food hotels for eating. In 2003 ,around 5% individuals were goes in fast food restaurants for lunch or dinner per day and approximately 15% per week and 30% per month. IN 2006 and 2013 ,the ratio were almost same just about 5% for those who eat in junk restaurants per day.In 2006,20% people who eat junk food per week and 25% per or twice a months.the ratio were same per year between 2006 and 2013. In 2013,the ratio of people who eat in fast food places were about 15% several times a week and the number were increase almost 30% per week.Almost 35% people who eat junk food per month.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0

The response attempts to address the prompt by describing data from the chart, such as mentioning the categories of eating frequency like per day, per week, and per month. However, the task achievement is significantly hindered by inaccurate reporting of the data and a poor overview. For example, the student writes 'around 5% individuals were goes in fast food restaurants... per day and approximately 15% per week and 30% per month' for 2003, whereas the actual figures were 4%, 17%, and 31% respectively—which are somewhat close, but the overall summary paragraph fails to clearly identify the main trends or overarching patterns (such as 'Once a week' being the most popular frequency in 2003 and 2006, shifting to monthly in 2013). The attempts at comparisons are vague and imprecise. This performance aligns with a Band 5.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0

The response exhibits basic organization with an introductory sentence, body details, and an attempt at an overview, but the overall progression is disjointed. Paragraphing is highly irregular, with multiple broken segments, inadequate spacing, and ideas clumped together rather than logically structured. Cohesive devices are either missing or misused, leading to a mechanical and repetitive feel. For instance, transitional phrases like 'In 2003,' are overused or awkwardly placed without supporting logical flow ('IN 2006 and 2013,the ratio were almost same...'). Pronoun referencing and substitution are occasionally faulty ('They were shows some flucatutions'), which makes it hard for the reader to follow the train of thought. This matches the descriptors for a Band 5.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.0

The student uses a limited and repetitive range of vocabulary, relying heavily on basic terms like 'people', 'ratio', 'eat', and informal or inaccurate collocations like 'junk food hotels' or 'junk restaurants' instead of 'fast food restaurants'. There are frequent word-choice errors, such as 'dominanat years which people more used fast food restaurents for those eat' and 'the number were increase almost 30%'. Less common vocabulary is attempted with very low accuracy, and spelling mistakes are present ('dominanat', 'flucatutions', 'restaurents'). Although the vocabulary is minimally adequate to convey a basic meaning, the lexical limitations and errors frequently strain understanding. This fits the Band 4.5/5.0 profile, comfortably scoring a Band 5.0.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 4.5

The response demonstrates a very limited range of grammatical structures. Most sentences attempt simple forms, and attempts at more complex structures are consistently faulty, such as 'the number of people who lives in usa and eat' (subject-verb agreement errors), 'around 5% individuals were goes in' (incorrect auxiliary/verb combinations), and 'the ratio were same per year'. Punctuation and spacing are also problematic throughout the text, with missing spaces after commas and periods. Frequent errors in tense, agreement, and word formation cause noticeable difficulty for the reader and impede clear communication. This performance reflects the Band 4.0/4.5 range, warranting a Band 4.5.

See this exact question answered at other band scores — the same prompt compared across bands.

Browse more IELTS Writing model answers or get your own writing scored by the same AI examiner.