Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-10-11

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 6.0)

The bar graph compares the proportion of people who eat junk food in the USA from 2003 to 2013.

Overall, once a week underwent a robust upward trajectory. However, everyday and never accounted for the smallest share and several times a week and once or twice a month experienced the major fluctuations over the period and a few times a year grew slightly and remained uniform throghout the given timeframe.

Initially, eating junk everyday started from 4% in 2003 and stagnated at 3% in 2006 and 2013. Moving further, several times a week remained at 17% in 2003 and climbed to 20% in 2006 and dropped to 16% in 2013. Furthermore, once a week made up the largest share and stood at 31% in 2003 and jump to 33% in 2006 and a modest decrease was recorded in 2013 at 27%.

In addition, the percentage of eating fast food for people who ate once or twice a month was 30% in 2003, which plummted shaply in 2006 at 25% and grew steadily in 2013 at 33%. Moreover, a few times a year experienced marginal growth from 13% in 2003 to 15% in 2006 and 2013. Additionally, never stood at 5% and fell slightly in 2006 and 2013 and remained uni

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

You identify the main pattern that weekly eating was common and that monthly eating became the leading category by 2013, and you support the account with figures for all six frequencies. Most reported values are close to the chart, but the 2013 once-a-week figure is 28%, not 27%. The overview also overstates the trend by calling once-a-week eating an upward trajectory: it rises to 33% in 2006, then falls to 28% in 2013. Similarly, “major fluctuations” is too broad for the two categories named, whose changes are moderate. The response covers the chart and selects relevant comparisons, but a more precise overview and careful checking of trends would make the key features clearer and better supported.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, an overview, and two paragraphs grouping the frequency categories. This gives the reader a coherent route through the data, and linking expressions such as “Furthermore” and “In addition” help connect details. However, the repeated use of “Moreover” and “Additionally” makes cohesion somewhat mechanical, while “Moving further” is not a natural transition. Some information is also crowded into long sentences, particularly the overview, where several trends are joined together without clear prioritisation. The final sentence is cut off at “remained uni,” leaving the account unfinished. Use clearer grouping and fewer formulaic connectors, and ensure the ending completes the final comparison.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use a reasonable range of vocabulary for describing data, including “proportion,” “accounted for,” “marginal growth,” and “modest decrease.” There are also attempts at less common expressions such as “robust upward trajectory,” but this is not an accurate description of a rise followed by a fall, and “stagnated” is less suitable for a small change from 4% to 3%. Several spelling errors—“throghout,” “plummted,” and “shaply”—reduce accuracy, and “junk food” is less precise than the chart’s term, fast food. Aim for natural, exact collocations rather than ornate wording, and proofread spelling. The range is adequate, but inconsistent precision and some inaccurate choices limit its effectiveness.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex structures, including clauses with “which” and time phrases such as “from 13% in 2003 to 15% in 2006 and 2013.” Meaning is generally understandable, but some verb forms and sentence constructions are inaccurate. For example, “stood at 31% … and jump to 33%” should use a past-tense form consistently, and “which plummted shaply in 2006 at 25%” has an unclear grammatical relationship between the change and the figure. The overview also contains a long sequence of joined clauses that would be clearer as separate sentences. The final sentence is incomplete, so it cannot be read as a complete grammatical unit. Check tense consistency, clause boundaries, and sentence completion during revision.

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.