Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-13

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The table below shows the change in some household types in Great Britain from 1971 to 2007.

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

PEOPLE IN HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE OF HOUSEHOLD AND FAMILY

Student answer (Band 6.0)

The following table displays the change in several household types in Great Britain from the timeline of 1971 to 2007.

In the first person household types, the percentages have doubled from 6% in 1971 to 12% in 2001 and then stayed the same till 2007. In one-family households, given the couple category. The no-children type family have risen up from 19% in 1971 to 25% in 2001 and then remained stable till 2007. The percentage of Dependent children families,on the other hand, fell gradually from 52% in 1971 to 36% in 2007.

There was not much change seen in the non-dependent children families. As the change only fluctuated by 1% rising from 10% to 11% and then went down to 9% in 2007. The last category of Lone parents was seen as the least in percentage, only 4%. But it tripled by the year of 2007.

In conclusion, The biggest downfall was of the Dependent children couple families,although they are still the highest percentage in the table even in the 2007, and the biggest rising trend was in Lone parent households since they tripled from their original percentage. Very minimal change was observed in the Non-Dependent children families. And the No children families went up only by 6%

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You identify the main movements accurately: the share of households with dependent children fell from 52% to 36%, while lone-parent households rose from 4% to 12%, and you note that the latter tripled. The overview also recognises that dependent-child households remained the largest category. This gives the response a clear account of several important features. However, some comparisons are incomplete or imprecise: the one-person figure reached 12% in 2001, not 2007, and the no-children category rose by six percentage points overall, rather than simply “went up only by 6%.” The opening does not provide a broad overview, and the final summary repeats points without adding much synthesis. A more explicit comparison of the largest decline with the increases would make the report more fully developed.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response is arranged in a generally logical order, moving from one-person households through the family categories and ending with a summary. Linking expressions such as “on the other hand,” “In conclusion,” and “although” help show contrast, and the reader can follow the main trends. However, the paragraph beginning “In one-family households, given the couple category” is incomplete and interrupts the progression. Some connections are also awkward: “As the change only fluctuated…” is a fragment, while the conclusion repeats details already reported rather than drawing the comparisons together. Grouping the figures into a clear overview followed by two organised detail paragraphs, and using complete sentences with clearer references, would make cohesion less mechanical and more effective.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use enough topic vocabulary to describe the table, including “percentages,” “remained stable,” “fell gradually,” “fluctuated,” and “tripled.” These choices communicate the broad trends, and some variation in wording avoids excessive repetition. However, several expressions are imprecise or unnatural for describing statistical data, such as “from the timeline of 1971 to 2007,” “risen up,” and “the least in percentage.” The repeated use of “families” for categories that the table labels as household types also reduces precision. “Biggest downfall” is too informal for an academic report, and “only” in “went up only by 6%” adds an unsupported judgement. More accurate collocations and neutral reporting language would improve control while keeping the vocabulary accessible.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mixture of simple and more complex sentences, including contrast clauses with “on the other hand” and “although,” and most of the intended meaning remains understandable. There are, however, some errors in sentence formation and punctuation. “In one-family households, given the couple category” is not a complete sentence, and “As the change only fluctuated…” is also a dependent clause presented as a sentence. In “The no-children type family have risen,” the subject and verb do not agree; “the percentage … has risen” would be grammatically sound. Capitalisation after commas and full stops is inconsistent, and commas are sometimes missing before clauses. Check that each sentence has a complete main clause, then proofread agreement and punctuation.

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.