Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Momentum Workout · 2026-08-21
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 5.5)
The pie chart compares the proportion of exports from numerous countries to India and China for the year 2000 and 2011.
Overall, Germany country has contributed maximum as compared to other countries in both of the year like in 2000 and 2011, conversely, Austria country contribution is least.
For India, the exports numbers for Germany are increased in 2011 which is 25% as in 2000 which is 15%, after that United Kingdom exports are greater in 2000 with 29% and in 2011 its 13% respectively. It is evident that for Finland, its 2% for both years.
Additionally, exports to China have different proportions means Germany 38% and 48% in 2000 and 2011 respectively. then Spain contribution is 2% and 3% this shows slight difference, again for France its greater previous with 13% and lower in 2011 which is 10%. Netherlands country depicts approximately same which is 4% in 2000 and 5% in 2011.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.5 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.5 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5
The response covers the main features of the data, identifying key trends for Germany and other countries. However, the analysis is somewhat mechanical, simply listing percentages rather than synthesizing the information effectively. The overview is present but lacks clarity due to awkward phrasing, such as 'Germany country has contributed maximum'. While all parts of the task are addressed, the comparison between the two years and the two destinations (India and China) could be more analytical. The report would benefit from grouping data more logically to highlight significant shifts rather than listing individual country statistics in isolation.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5
The response is organized into paragraphs, which helps the reader follow the structure. However, the use of cohesive devices is often mechanical or inaccurate. Phrases like 'after that' and 'again for France' feel forced and do not create a smooth flow of information. The referencing is sometimes unclear, such as 'its greater previous', which makes it difficult to follow the comparison. While there is a logical progression from the overview to specific details, the lack of sophisticated linking words limits the coherence of the response. Improving the variety and precision of transition signals would significantly enhance the readability of the report.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.5
The vocabulary is adequate for the task but lacks the precision and range required for a higher band. There is a reliance on basic descriptors like 'maximum', 'greater', and 'lower'. The student struggles with word choice and collocation, such as 'Germany country' and 'exports numbers', which are not standard English. There are also instances of awkward phrasing, such as 'its greater previous', which hinders clarity. To improve, the student should focus on using more precise terminology related to data description, such as 'accounted for', 'witnessed a rise', or 'remained stable', and avoid unnecessary repetition of basic adjectives.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5
The response contains a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, but there are frequent grammatical errors that occasionally impede clarity. Issues include incorrect article usage ('the year 2000 and 2011'), subject-verb agreement ('Germany country has contributed'), and awkward sentence construction ('Germany 38% and 48% in 2000 and 2011 respectively. then Spain contribution is 2%'). Punctuation is also inconsistent, with run-on sentences and missing commas. While the meaning is generally understandable, the frequency of these errors prevents the writing from reaching a higher band. Focusing on basic sentence structure and proofreading for subject-verb agreement would be beneficial.
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.