Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · IELTS Momentum Workout · 2026-11-08

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The pie charts below show exports from various EU countries to India and China in 2000 and 2011.

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

EU Exports of Goods to India and China in 2000 and 2011

Student answer (Band 6.5)

The four pie charts illustrate the proportion of exports to India and China from different European countries in the year 2000 and 2011.

Overall, Germany was the largest exporter in both years, except to India in the year 2000 where the UK made the highest rate of export. On the other hand, Austria made up the lowest contribution to exports of goods in both years.

In the year 2000, the United Kingdom contributed 29% in the export of good to India; however, Germany contributed 38% in the export of goods to China. Belgium was the second largest exporter to India, accounted for 25%, while France maintained the second-position in exports to China, with 13%. While 15% of the export was done by Germany to India, other EU countires made the contributions below 10%. In case of China, the rest of the European countries accounted for less than 10% in the exports of goods.

In the year 2011, Germany made the highest contribution in exporting products to both India and China, with 25% and 48%, respectively. 20% of the exports were done by Belgium to India, thereby maintained its second-position as a contributor in both years. The UK made 13% in terms of export, while the rest of the countries made lower than 10%. In contrast, 10% was made by France and the other mentioned EU territories contributed less than 10%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You identify the main pattern that Germany dominated exports to China in both years and became the leading exporter to India by 2011, while the UK led India-bound exports in 2000. Several key figures are accurate, including the UK’s 29% to India and Germany’s 38% to China in 2000, and Germany’s 25% and 48% in 2011. The overview is relevant, but the claim that Austria was the lowest contributor in both years is not consistently true: in 2000, Austria’s 1% to India was lowest, but to China Finland, Spain and Austria were not all equally low, and in 2011 Finland’s 2% to China was the minimum. Some comparisons are also broad, such as saying all remaining countries were below 10%, which overlooks France’s 13% to China in 2000. More precise selection and comparison would strengthen coverage.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The response has a clear four-part structure: an introduction, an overview, and separate paragraphs for 2000 and 2011. This gives the reader a logical route through the two time periods, and linking expressions such as “Overall,” “On the other hand,” and “In contrast” help signal relationships. The chronological grouping is effective, though comparisons between India and China could be made more consistently within each paragraph rather than sometimes listing one market and then the other. A few transitions are not fully logical: “thereby maintained its second-position” follows the 2011 figure but refers back to both years, and “In contrast” does not clearly identify what the final China figures contrast with. Clearer referencing and more deliberate links between comparisons would make the progression smoother.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.5

You use a suitable range of task-related vocabulary, including “proportion,” “contributed,” “highest contribution,” and “second-position,” and the meaning is generally clear. There are, however, several awkward or inaccurate collocations that limit precision. For example, “made the highest rate of export” is less natural than “accounted for the largest share of exports,” while “contributed 29% in the export” should be expressed as “accounted for 29% of exports.” “Export of good” also needs the plural “goods,” and “EU countires” contains a spelling error. Repeated use of “made” and “contributed” makes some descriptions sound less flexible. Aim for accurate percentage collocations and vary reporting verbs without sacrificing clarity.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You attempt a mix of simple and complex sentences, including contrast clauses with “however” and “while,” and most of the information remains understandable. Some grammatical errors persist, particularly in sentence construction and verb patterns. In “Belgium was the second largest exporter to India, accounted for 25%,” the second clause needs a finite verb or a participial form, such as “accounting for 25%.” The phrase “thereby maintained its second-position” also needs a grammatically complete construction, for example “thereby maintaining its second position.” In “the rest of the countries made lower than 10%,” the comparison lacks a suitable verb phrase. There are also article and number issues in “export of good.” More consistent control of these patterns would improve accuracy while retaining your varied sentence forms.

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.