Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-10-28

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 given bar diagram shows the comparison of the frequency of Americans eating at fast food joints in the years 2003, 2006, and 2013.

Overall, the highest proportion of people ate in restaurants once a week or once to twice a month; the lowest proportion of people ate almost every day or never in fast food joints.

In the year 2003, around 4% of people ate outside every day, which is the lowest; 5% of people never ate in restaurants, followed by ratio of people eating outside only a few times a year, around 13%, several times a week around 17%, once or twice a month3 0% and finally highest proportion, around 32% people ate outside once a week.

In the year 2006, the majority of people, around 33%, ate in restaurants once a week, 25% once or twice a month, and the lowest proportion around 2% everyday. Finally in the year 2013, the majority around 32% ate once or twice a month outside and the lowest around 3% ate everyday in restaurants.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You provide a relevant overview, identifying weekly and monthly dining as the most common frequencies and daily eating or never eating as the least common. You also report several key figures accurately, including 33% eating weekly in 2006 and 33% eating once or twice a month in 2013. However, some details are inaccurate or incomplete: in 2003, the weekly figure is about 31%, not 32%, and the monthly figure is 30%; in 2006, daily eating is about 3%, not 2%. The 2013 monthly figure is about 33%, rather than 32%. Several categories, especially the changes in “a few times a year” and “several times a week,” receive little comparison. More precise reporting across the years would make the summary more complete.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction, an overview, and paragraphs describing the years in sequence. This makes the main information easy to follow, and phrases such as “Overall” and “In the year 2006” signal the organisation. The year-by-year approach is coherent, but it leads to a list-like account rather than consistently highlighting comparisons between years. Some links between figures are also awkward, particularly the long 2003 sentence, where several categories are joined by semicolons and commas. To strengthen progression, group related categories or changes together and use comparisons such as “by contrast” or “while” to show how the distributions shifted over time. The paragraphing is appropriate, though cohesion is not always smooth.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of task-related vocabulary, including “proportion,” “majority,” “frequency,” and “lowest,” and the meaning is generally clear. There are, however, some imprecise or unnatural choices. “Fast food joints” is informal for an academic report, while “ate outside” can suggest eating outdoors rather than dining at a restaurant. “Followed by ratio of people” is an awkward phrase, and “once to twice a month” is less natural than the chart’s “once or twice a month.” Repeating “ate” and “people” also limits flexibility. Aim for precise chart language such as “the share of respondents” and “dined at fast-food restaurants,” while varying reporting verbs carefully. These improvements would make the vocabulary more accurate and appropriately formal.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of sentence forms, including a clear overview sentence and longer sentences that report several figures. Most of the message remains understandable, but some grammatical and punctuation errors reduce accuracy. In “once or twice a month3 0%,” the number is incorrectly spaced and the sentence structure breaks down; the long 2003 sentence also needs clearer punctuation and parallel phrasing. “Followed by ratio of people” is missing a determiner, and “the lowest proportion around 2% everyday” lacks a clear verb or preposition. Use complete, controlled clauses—for example, “The figure for daily visits was about 3%”—and check articles, sentence boundaries, and punctuation. More accurate complex sentences would improve control without sacrificing range.

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.