Band 4.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 4.0 · Recent IELTS Exams (Canada & India) · 2026-09-13
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.
* Note: these aren’t the original diagrams given in the test, they were recreated for the purpose of demonstration.
Student answer (Band 4.0)
The pie chart illustrate that the number of adults spent their working house time in 1958 and 2008. overall, in 1958, alots of people were doing various activities like the maximum 33% time spend by working people and on the other side 2% time spent by traveling . this was the few percentage spent time on traveling. moreover , 32% persecent time spent by human beings on sleeping and also 8% persecent and 19% perscent adults were going outside with friends and family's and relaxing. In 2008, the largest time 42% spent by people on working then 6% time spent on traveling by them furthermore, 7% time spent time on traveling and playing games by human .last 13% people spent time at home for relaxation.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 4.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 4.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 4.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 4.0 |
| Overall | 4.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 4.5
The response attempts to summarise data from two pie charts comparing how working adults spent their time in 1958 and 2008. However, the candidate fails to meet the minimum word count of 150 words, reaching only 125 words, which negatively impacts task achievement. Furthermore, some data points are incorrectly reported or confused, such as stating that '13% people spent time at home for relaxation' in 2008, and the reporting of travelling time lacks clarity and precision. While there is an attempt at an overview ('overall, in 1958...'), the overall response remains under-developed and incomplete, leading to a band score of 4.5.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 4.0
The text suffers from severe structural and organisational issues. Paragraphing is virtually non-existent, with the entire body written as a single, poorly formatted block interspersed with excessive spacing and erratic punctuation (e.g., 'overall, in 1958, alots of people were...'). Cohesive devices are used very clumsily or inappropriately, such as 'on the other side' and 'furthermore', which do not accurately signal logical relationships between the data points. There is no clear progression of ideas, making it difficult for the reader to follow the comparison between the two years. This aligns well with the Band 4 descriptors.
Lexical Resource — Band 4.0
The lexical range is extremely basic and repetitive, relying heavily on simple words like 'time', 'spent', 'people', and 'year'. There are numerous spelling errors and non-standard word choices, such as 'alots', 'persecent', 'perscent', and 'working house time'. The candidate lacks the vocabulary necessary to discuss statistical data precisely, failing to use standard synonyms or reporting verbs such as 'allocated', 'accounted for', or 'proportion'. Consequently, the lexical resource is limited and strains the reader, fitting a Band 4.0 profile.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 4.0
The grammatical structures attempted are overwhelmingly simple and frequently flawed. The text contains numerous basic errors in sentence construction, agreement, and word forms, such as 'The pie chart illustrate that the number of adults spent...' and 'maximum 33% time spend by working people'. Complex sentence forms are virtually absent, and punctuation is erratic and non-standard throughout the text. Due to the high frequency of grammatical errors that occasionally impede understanding, the grammar is best classified at Band 4.0.
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.
