Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-10-19

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)

As we can see from the above chart that in 2003 about 4% of people used to eat in fast food restaurants everyday , but then in 2006 the percentage decreased to around 3% and it still remains that way specifically until 2013 as mentioned in chard , and around 17% people used to eat in fast food restaurants several times a week , this percentage increased to 20% in 2006 as the craze for fast food increased , and in 2013 the craze reduced back to 16% . While around 31% people used to eat fast food once a week in 2003 , this number again spiked up to 33% in 2006 and then reduce back further down to 27% in 2013 . Around 30% people used to go to fast food restaurants in 2003 once or twice a month this number greatly reduced in 2006 to 25% but then spiked up again even further to 32% in 2013 . There were 12% people in USA in 2003 that would eat fast food few times in a year , this number increased in 2006 to 15% and stayed the same until 2013 according to this chart . Meanwhile there were some people around 5% to be exact that never visited fast food restaurants in their life but this number decreased in 2006 to 4% and then stayed the same until 2013 .

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

You report all six frequency categories and include figures for each year, so the response is relevant and contains several accurate comparisons, such as the monthly category falling from 30% to 25% before rising to about 33%. However, it lacks a clear overview of the main patterns; instead, it lists categories one by one and adds an unsupported explanation that the changes reflect the “craze for fast food.” Some figures are inaccurate: once a week in 2013 is about 28%, not 27%, and “never” is about 3.5% in both 2006 and 2013, rather than 4%. The account therefore addresses the task only partially, with limited selection and interpretation of the key features. Begin with a concise overview and report the chart without speculating about causes.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.5

The categories are presented in a generally recognisable sequence, and time comparisons are often signalled with words such as “but then,” “while,” and “meanwhile.” This gives the reader some sense of how the figures change. However, the response is one long paragraph, with no clear overview or grouping of related trends, so the progression feels like a repeated list rather than a structured summary. Connectors are also used mechanically, especially repeated “and then” constructions, and several sentences join multiple categories and years without clear boundaries. For example, the opening sentence moves from daily eating to several-times-a-week eating in one extended chain. Use separate paragraphs for an overview and grouped details, and make each sentence focus on one category or a clear comparison.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use enough topic vocabulary to identify the chart’s categories, including “everyday,” “several times a week,” and “once or twice a month,” and verbs such as “increased,” “decreased,” and “stayed” communicate basic changes. However, the range is limited and some choices are informal or imprecise for an academic report. “Craze for fast food” introduces an unsupported, conversational interpretation, while “spiked up” and “greatly reduced” are less neutral than needed. There are also awkward phrases such as “there were 12% people” and “some people around 5% to be exact.” Aim for precise reporting language and consistent category wording, for example, “the proportion of people who ate fast food” and “rose to” or “fell to.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response attempts longer sentences to compare figures across years, and the meaning is usually recoverable. However, these complex sentences are often poorly controlled, with frequent problems in sentence boundaries, clause structure, and verb forms. The opening, “As we can see from the above chart that…,” combines an unnecessary introductory clause with “that,” and the long sentence that follows runs several comparisons together. There are also tense and agreement errors, such as “then reduce back” and “this number… stayed,” alongside missing or inconsistent punctuation. Use a wider mix of shorter, complete sentences and controlled comparison clauses. Check past-tense forms (“reduced”) and separate each main comparison with a full stop or semicolon.

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.