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 bar graphs depicts how frequent individual in the United State of America ate in fast food restaurants in over a decade.
The figures are expressed in percentage.
Overall, american citizen who eat once or twice week by fast food chain in year 2013 equate with 30% people with prepare to ate at fast food restaurant once a week. Individual that never eat and people who eat everyday yields the same stats for the past decade, with a slight increase by only 1 percent in the year 2003 for those people who eat everyday in a restaurant.
People who prefer to have a meal a few times a year shows an increase in year 2006 but remain 15% until 2013, individual which prefer to have a meal several times a week start at 17% then rise to 20% by the year 2006, but fall to 16% in year 2013. People who likes to have a meal once a week show a familiar pattern that start at 30% in the year 2003 slightly increase in the year 2006 by 3% then decrease in the year 2013 by 5%.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0
The student attempts to summarize the main features and trends of the bar chart, but there are notable inaccuracies in reporting the data. For instance, the text states that in 2013, those who eat 'once or twice week' equate to '30% people with prepare to ate at fast food restaurant once a week', which confuses categories and data points. The chart shows that 'Once a week' was 28% in 2013, while 'Once or twice a month' was 33%. Furthermore, while some general trends are captured, such as the slight fluctuation in eating fast food several times a week, the overall response lacks a clear, well-developed overview, and the specific figures cited frequently misalign with the visual data. This places the performance firmly at Band 5.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0
The essay is divided into paragraphs, but the organization and progression of ideas are frequently hindered by awkward phrasing and poor referencing. Cohesive devices are either missing, inadequate, or repetitive. For example, sentences in the body paragraphs tend to run together with comma splices or confusing transitions, such as 'People who prefer to have a meal a few times a year shows an increase in year 2006 but remain 15% until 2013, individual which prefer...'. The referencing is not always clear, making it difficult for the reader to follow the logical development of ideas. Paragraphing is attempted, but internal cohesion is weak, resulting in an overall score of Band 5.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The vocabulary used is very basic and repetitive, with frequent word-formation and collocation errors. Examples include 'how frequent individual', 'american citizen', 'equate with 30% people with prepare to ate', and 'People who likes'. These errors often impede communication or cause strain for the reader. The range of vocabulary is limited to simple terms directly lifted or poorly paraphrased from the prompt. While there are a few attempts at less common items, they are marred by significant inaccuracies in form and usage. This fits the Band 5 descriptor for lexical resource.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0
Grammatical control is weak throughout the response, featuring a very limited range of structures and frequent errors. There are numerous basic errors in verb forms, subject-verb agreement, and tense consistency, such as 'depicts how frequent individual... ate', 'american citizen who eat', and 'shows an increase in year 2006 but remain'. Complex sentence structures attempted by the student are consistently faulty, often resulting in ungrammatical or incomprehensible clauses. Punctuation is also poorly managed, contributing to run-on sentences. These frequent errors cause considerable difficulty for the reader, justifying a band score of 4.5, rounded to 5.0 based on general performance parameters.
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.