Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Recent IELTS Exams (Canada & India) · 2026-09-08

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The pie charts below show how working adults in a particular country spent their time in 1958 and 2008.

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

IELTS Writing Task 1 percentages of the day adults spent on activities

* Note: these aren’t the original diagrams given in the test, they were recreated for the purpose of demonstration.

Student answer (Band 5.0)

The given pie charts demonstrate the proportion of working adults who utilised time on different laisure activities in 1958 and 2008.

Overall, it is quite evident that working and sleeping recorded the top possition amomg adult in both years. In addition, others varried more flucuated over the period.

In detail, in 1958, the adults who spent time on working was highest at a one third, which followed by sleeping at slightly less than 33%. Realxing at home stood around one-tenth. The adult less prefered to expenditure time on moving to work, which figure was nagligible. Going out with friends accounted for the higher figure compare to going out.

Moreover, the propertion of time spend by audults on playing sports and travelling to work was identical, with specific figure at 7% and the figure registered a quite less for going out with friend comapre to this. The youngster choosed to spen higher time on working rather than relaxing at home.

AI examiner evaluation

CriterionBand
Task Achievement / Task Response5.0
Coherence and Cohesion5.5
Lexical Resource5.0
Grammatical Range and Accuracy5.0
Overall5.0

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0

The response attempts to summarize the data, but it fails to accurately report the main features. The description of the data is often confusing or factually incorrect based on the provided charts (e.g., stating working was 'one third' when it was 33% in 1958, and misinterpreting the comparison of activities). The overview is vague, and the analysis lacks the precision required for an Academic Task 1 response. Key trends are not clearly highlighted, and the information is presented in a way that makes it difficult for the reader to understand the actual changes between 1958 and 2008.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5

The essay is organized into paragraphs, but the logical flow is weak. While there is an attempt to use cohesive devices like 'In addition' and 'Moreover', they are often used incorrectly or do not effectively link the ideas. The progression of information is disjointed, and the referencing is sometimes unclear, making it difficult to follow the comparison between the two years. The structure is mechanical rather than fluid, which hinders the overall coherence of the report.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.0

The vocabulary is limited and contains numerous spelling errors, such as 'laisure', 'possition', 'amomg', 'varried', 'flucuated', 'nagligible', and 'propertion'. These errors are frequent and sometimes impede communication. The range of vocabulary is basic, and there is a lack of precision in describing data trends (e.g., 'the figure registered a quite less'). The student struggles to use appropriate collocations for describing statistical data, which significantly impacts the clarity of the report.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0

The response relies on simple sentence structures, and attempts at more complex sentences are often marred by grammatical errors. There are frequent issues with subject-verb agreement (e.g., 'adults who spent time... was highest'), incorrect word forms (e.g., 'less prefered to expenditure'), and awkward phrasing. Punctuation is generally acceptable, but the high frequency of grammatical errors throughout the text makes the writing difficult to read and reduces the overall accuracy of the information presented.

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.