Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Momentum Workout · 2026-09-30

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 charts illustrate exports from different countries to India and China in 2000 and 2011.

overall, In 2000, India recieved highest goods from United Kingdom where as, in 2011, Germany supplies more goods. On the other side, Germany exports highest proportion of goods to China in both years 2000 and 2011.

In India, UK was the most significant supplier in 2000 with 29% which was declined to 13% in 2011. Belgium and Germany contributes by 25% and 15% in 2000 while in 2011, Belgium number reduced by 5% and Germany increased by 10%. France,Italy,Others and Netherlands supplies were 8%,7%,5% and 4% respectively in 2000. However, in 2011 there were no significant change in number, it remains almost same. Moreover, Sweden,Spain,Finland and Austria exports almost same proportion of goods in both years by 2-3%.

In China, Germany domainants in export goods in both the years by 38% and 48% in 2000 and in 2011 followed by France, Italy and United Kingdom with 13%, 9% and 9% respectively in 2000. This number fell in 2011 to 10%, 8% and 7% respectively. Furthermore, contribution of other countries such as Sweden,Spain, Netherlands, Austria, Belgium, Finland and Other varies between 2% to 8% in 2000 however, this number almost remain unchanged in 2011.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

The student attempts to cover the main features of the pie charts comparing EU exports to India and China in 2000 and 2011. An overview is provided, noting the shifts in India and the dominance of Germany in China. However, there are several inaccuracies in data reporting. For instance, the student states that Belgium contributed 25% and Germany 15% in 2000, whereas the chart shows Belgium at 25% and Germany at 15% for India, but minor errors occur in percentage manipulation (e.g., stating 'Belgium number reduced by 5% and Germany increased by 10%' when Belgium went from 25% to 20% - a drop of 5% points - and Germany from 15% to 25% - a rise of 10% points). The comparison is generally clear, but some data descriptions are slightly vague or imprecise. Overall, the response fulfills the basic requirements of Task 1, but tighter control over numerical details and a more polished overview are needed for a higher band.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response is arranged into logical paragraphs, beginning with an introduction and overall statement, followed by distinct paragraphs for India and China. Cohesive devices such as 'In 2000', 'while in 2011', 'However', and 'Furthermore' are used to connect ideas. However, paragraphing and referencing can be clunky, and sentence transitions feel somewhat mechanical. For example, 'On the other side' is a slightly unnatural transitional phrase for contrasting chart data. Paragraphing is present and separates the two main countries, but the internal logical flow within paragraphs occasionally feels cluttered due to listing multiple small countries without clear grouping. Overall, the organizational structure is adequate and maintains a clear progression.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

The student uses a satisfactory range of vocabulary relevant to the visual data, including terms like 'exports', 'proportion', 'supplier', and 'dominants'. However, there are notable lexical errors and spelling mistakes throughout the text, such as 'recieved' instead of 'received', 'domainants' instead of 'dominate' or 'dominant', and awkward word choices like 'supplies were ... respectively'. There is an attempt to use less common vocabulary, but precision in collocation and word formation is lacking. While communication is not impeded, the frequent lexical errors restrict the score to a Band 5.5.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

The student demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, such as relative clauses ('UK was the most significant supplier in 2000 with 29% which was declined to 13%') and coordinate clauses. However, grammatical accuracy is inconsistent. There are frequent errors in verb tense and voice, such as 'goods from United Kingdom where as, in 2011, Germany supplies more goods' (shifting tenses inappropriately) and 'there were no significant change in number, it remains almost same' (subject-verb agreement and comma splices). Punctuation and capitalization errors also appear (e.g., starting a sentence with 'overall,' with a lowercase letter). These errors occasionally cause slight strain for the reader.

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.