Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Academic Practice Accelerator · 2026-09-16

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The table gives information about the average hours spent on the Internet by European people of different age groups.

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

Student answer (Band 5.5)

so i started with that mostly people use internet just for entertainment and watching movies and in presective that most of the time we need to use on technology and about study nowadays in Europein countries small child watch cartoons online for hours and also play game online and thier parents are also encouraging then to watch and old generation don't use much internet and women are always watching about food and etc so on my pov it can cause a Brain damage and also it can cause eyes problem which is very common in Europein countries because they spent their mostly time on Internet Overall, internet usage peaks dramatically in the youth demographic, specifically among individuals aged 16 to 20, before steadily declining as age increases. Furthermore, younger males generally spend more time online than their female counterparts, whereas females exhibit slightly higher internet usage in older age categories.Detailed AnalysisPeak Usage (Ages 16–20): This demographic records the highest online engagement. Young men spend an average of 19 hours online per week, slightly outpacing young women, who average 18 hours.School-Aged and Young Adults (Ages 11–15 & 21–25):In the 11–15 bracket, boys spend 8 hours online compared to 6 hours for girls.A comparable gap is visible in the 21–25 age group, where men log 7 hours and women log 5 hours.Older Demographics (Ages 26–51+):For the 26–30 age group, internet usage equalizes at exactly 4 hours per week for both genders.In the oldest categories (31–50 and 51+), the trend reverses. Women lead men with 4 hours and 3 hours respectively, while men drop to 3 hours and a baseline low of 2 hours per week.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5

The response presents a somewhat disjointed approach initially, beginning with a conversational and slightly irrelevant personal viewpoint containing unsupported claims about brain damage and television habits. However, the candidate transitions into a well-structured analytical section headed as 'Detailed Analysis' that accurately reports the main features and data points from the table. The key trends—such as peak usage in the 16–20 age group (19 hours for males, 18 for females) and the cross-over in older demographics where women surpass men—are correctly identified and compared. While the opening paragraph lacks academic tone and wanders from the visual data, the subsequent overview and bulleted breakdown salvage the task response adequately, covering all parts of the prompt with clear comparisons, though the integration of extraneous personal commentary prevents a higher band.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5

The organizational structure of this essay is polarized. The first part is written as a single, rambling, unpunctuated block of text that lacks clear logical progression and features poor cohesive control (e.g., 'so i started with that... and about study nowadays...'). Conversely, the second half of the response adopts a much more coherent structure, utilizing clear headings, bullet points, and logical sequencing to present the statistical data. Overall, paragraphing and logical flow are inconsistent. While cohesive devices like 'Furthermore', 'whereas', and 'In the 11–15 bracket' are deployed effectively in the second half, the chaotic opening section pulls down the overall score for cohesion and structural arrangement.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

The vocabulary ranges from informal and repetitive in the opening paragraph to more precise, task-appropriate terminology in the detailed section. The candidate successfully employs less common and topic-specific vocabulary such as 'demographic', 'engagement', 'outpacing', 'baseline', and 'counterparts'. However, there are noticeable lexical and spelling inaccuracies, particularly in the first half ('presective', 'Europein', 'mostly time'), alongside awkward collocations like 'Brain damage'. Despite these flaws, the range used in the second half is sufficient to accomplish the task adequately, allowing the reader to follow the intended data reporting without significant hindrance.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

The grammatical profile reflects a mixed ability. The opening sentences suffer from severe run-on structures, improper capitalization, and punctuation failures, stringing multiple clauses together with coordinating conjunctions like 'and'. In contrast, the 'Detailed Analysis' section demonstrates a much better mix of simple and complex sentence forms with improved control over punctuation. Grammatical errors are frequent in the first half—such as subject-verb agreement issues ('small child watch') and incorrect modifiers ('they spent their mostly time')—while the second half is noticeably more accurate. This results in an uneven performance where a mix of structures is evident, but persistent errors 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.