Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 4.5 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-10-20

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 4.5)

THE bar graph demonstrates the how individuals in the USA ate in fast food restaurants from 2003 to 2013.

In general overview, it is clearly seen that frequency of eating fast food is significantly fluctuating over the given period of time ,while people donot prefer fast food everyday respectively.

In 2003, people who ate fast food everyday was 4 % whereas from 2006 to 2013 was 4% constantly Nextly, people who ate several time at week in 2003 was 16% but in 2006 in steadly increased with 20 %, in 2013 it dropped with 14 %respectievly . Moreover people who eat once a week from2003 to 2006 it was 30 above and in 2013

it was 27%

moving towards further information people who ate once in 2003 was 30%,in 2006 it was declined by 5% and which are left is commonly prefered by all was 3

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 3.5

You identify the topic and attempt to compare several categories, including daily eating and weekly visits. However, the overview is vague and inaccurate: the chart does not show that frequency “significantly fluctuating,” and daily eating stayed low rather than being a meaningful overall trend. Several figures are misreported: daily eating in 2013 was about 3%, not 4%; several times a week was about 17%, 20% and 16%, not 16%, 20% and 14%; and once a week was about 31%, 33% and 28%. The final comparison is incomplete and unclear, with no reliable account of the less-frequent categories. The response is also 12 words below the 150-word minimum. Add a precise overview and accurately report the main patterns and comparisons.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.5

There is an attempt to organise the response into an introduction, an overview and detail paragraphs, and sequencing phrases such as “In 2003” and “Moreover” help signal movement between points. However, progression is difficult to follow because the details are crowded into long, incomplete passages, and the final paragraph does not clearly identify which category its figures refer to. The phrase “moving towards further information” does not establish a clear relationship with the preceding comparison, while “respectively” is used without a clear paired set. Use separate paragraphs for the overview and grouped comparisons, and connect each figure explicitly to its category and year. This would make the organisation more coherent and reduce the reader’s need to infer meaning.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some task-relevant vocabulary, including “frequency,” “declined” and “increased,” and the reader can generally recognise that you are describing changes in restaurant visits. However, the range is limited and several word choices or collocations are inaccurate, which sometimes makes the meaning unclear. For example, “significantly fluctuating” is not a precise description of the overall pattern, and “people donot prefer fast food everyday” does not clearly express the chart’s low daily percentages. There are also spelling and form errors such as “respectievly” and “prefered.” Aim for accurate, neutral reporting language, such as “the proportion,” “rose to,” “fell to” and “remained relatively low,” rather than forcing complex phrasing.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

The response attempts some longer sentence forms, using contrast with “whereas” and time clauses such as “from 2003 to 2006,” but control is inconsistent. Errors in agreement and verb forms appear in “people who ate fast food everyday was 4%” and “it dropped with 14%,” while missing or misplaced punctuation makes several sentences run together. The opening also has an unnecessary article in “demonstrates the how,” and the final sentence is incomplete, ending with “was 3” without a clear subject or finished comparison. These problems sometimes obscure the intended relationships between figures. Build accuracy with shorter complete sentences first, checking subject–verb agreement, past-tense forms and sentence boundaries before adding more complex clauses.

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.