Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 19 · 2026-08-21

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The graph below gives information on the numbers of participants for different activities at one social centre in Melbourne, Australia for the period 2000 to 2020.

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

 

 

Student answer (Band 6.0)

The graph illustrates information about the numbers of participants for five different activities at one of the social centre in Melbourne, Australia between 2000 and 2020.

Overall, it is clear that film club had the highest number of participants throughout the period whereas, musical performances started a bit later than others increased gradually over time.

Firstly, film club had around 65 members in 2000, it then experienced a fluctuation and declined to 60 member in 2010, before rising again to around 68 member. Amateur dramatics started with around 25 members, reached the peak of 30 members in 2005 before declining gradually to less than 10 members in 2020. Table tennis started with around 15 member in 2000, it then increase gradually and reached around 55 by 2020.

Martial arts started with around 35 members, rose to a peak of around 39 members in 2010, before falling back to almost its original level by 2020. Musical Performances started later than others at 2005 with 0 member, increased gradually and reached around 15 members by end of 2020.

AI examiner evaluation

CriterionBand
Task Achievement / Task Response6.0
Coherence and Cohesion6.0
Lexical Resource5.5
Grammatical Range and Accuracy5.5
Overall6.0

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.0

The response covers all key features of the graph, including the trends for all five activities. The overview is clear and identifies the main trends, such as the film club's dominance and the gradual growth of musical performances. However, the report could be improved by making more explicit comparisons between the categories rather than just listing the data for each one individually. While the main features are highlighted, the analysis is somewhat descriptive and lacks a more sophisticated synthesis of the data trends over the twenty-year period.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.0

The essay is logically organized with a clear introduction, overview, and body paragraphs. The progression of ideas is easy to follow. Cohesive devices are used, such as 'Firstly', 'it then', and 'whereas', which help to link the sentences. However, some of the transitions are a bit mechanical, and the paragraphing could be improved by grouping the activities based on their trends (e.g., those that increased versus those that declined) rather than just listing them one by one. This would create a more cohesive and analytical flow.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

The range of vocabulary is adequate for the task, with terms like 'fluctuation', 'declined', and 'gradually' used correctly to describe trends. There are some minor errors in word form, such as '60 member' instead of '60 members' and '15 member' instead of '15 members'. While the vocabulary is sufficient to convey the meaning clearly, it lacks the variety and precision required for a higher band score. Incorporating more sophisticated synonyms for 'started' or 'increased' would enhance the lexical quality.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

The response uses a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. There are several grammatical errors, particularly with pluralization (e.g., '60 member', '15 member') and article usage (e.g., 'one of the social centre'). Additionally, there are some comma splices, such as 'film club had around 65 members in 2000, it then experienced...', which should be corrected with a conjunction or a semicolon. While these errors do not impede communication, they occur frequently enough to prevent a higher score.

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.