Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-11-03

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 chart illustrates the percentage of people eating at fast food restaurants in the USA in 2003, 2006 and 2013.

Overall, across all the three years participation varies; maximum number of people went out once a week, whereas eating fast food everyday was least common.

Eating fast food once a week was very frequent between 30 to 35 percent in 2003 and 2006, whereas it stood at 28% in 2013. Visiting fast-food restaurants was very common once or twice a month, accounted for 30% of participating in 2003, 25% in 2006 and 33% in 2013. 15 to 20% of people go out for eating several times a week.

Eating at restaurants a few times in a year was at 15% in 2006 and 2013, while 13% in 2003. Those who never went to fast food outlets was under 5% in 2003, whereas below 4% in 2006 and 2013. Eating fast food everyday was the lowest, at less than 4% in all the three years.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

The response identifies the chart’s subject and gives a relevant overview: weekly visits were among the most common frequencies, while daily eating was least common. It also reports several key figures accurately, including monthly visits at 30%, 25% and 33%, and the 2013 weekly figure of 28%. This covers the main patterns, but the overview is not fully precise: once a week was highest in 2006, whereas once or twice a month was highest in 2013, so there is no single frequency that was the maximum across all three years. Some comparisons are also broad or incomplete, such as “15 to 20%” for several-times-weekly visits. Distinguishing the changing peak category and comparing the main rises and falls would make the account more fully developed.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response is arranged in a clear sequence: an introduction, an overview, and paragraphs reporting the frequency categories. This gives the reader a coherent overall account, and contrast markers such as “whereas” help connect comparisons. However, progression within the body is somewhat list-like, with categories reported one after another rather than grouped to highlight related trends. Some linking is also imprecise: “15 to 20%” is not clearly tied to each year, and “Overall, across all the three years participation varies” does not clearly preview the main pattern. Grouping the most common frequencies together and then the less common ones, while using explicit year references, would strengthen cohesion and make comparisons easier to follow.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

The vocabulary is adequate for describing the chart, with useful terms such as “percentage,” “frequent,” “accounted for,” and “least common.” The writer also varies expressions for eating out, which helps avoid excessive repetition. Some choices are imprecise or unnatural for a data report, however: “participation” is vague in this context, “went out for eating” is awkward, and “maximum number of people” does not fit the percentage comparison as naturally as “highest proportion.” “Everyday” is also used where the adverbial phrase “every day” is intended. More precise chart language and natural collocations would improve clarity and control, while retaining the generally understandable range shown here.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

The response uses a mix of simple statements and longer comparative sentences, including clauses joined with “whereas,” and the main information remains understandable. Some grammatical errors persist, particularly with agreement and sentence construction. For example, “Those who never went … was under 5%” has a plural subject with a singular verb, and “once or twice a month, accounted for 30% of participating” is an awkwardly constructed clause. The opening overview, “across all the three years participation varies,” also has an unnatural article and word order. There is some control of basic past-tense reporting, but more consistent agreement, clearer clause structure, and careful proofreading of articles and punctuation would improve accuracy.

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.