Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Momentum Workout · 2026-10-09

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 IMAGE DEVIDED IN FOUR PIE CHARTS WHICH ILLUSTRATES EXPORT OF GOODS TO INDIA AND CHINA FROM EU COUNTRIES LIKE AUSTRIA, BELGIUM, FINLAND, FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY, SPAIN AND MANY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE YEAR OF 2000 AND 2011. OVERALL, IN BOTH YEAR, THE HIGHEST GOODS WERE EXPORTED BY UNITED KINGDOM IN YEAR 2000 AND BY GERMANY IN 2011 TO INDIA AND GERMANY ALSO EXPORTED GOODS TO CHINA IN BOTH YEARS.

FIRSTLY, IN INDIA, THE HUGE AMOUNT OF GOODS WERE COME FROM UNITED KINGDOM, BELGIUM AND GERMANY, IT WAS 29, 25 AND 15 PERCENTAGES IN YEAR 2000. AFTER A DACADE THIS PRAPOTION WERE CHANGE AND INDIA GOT HIGHEST GOODS BY SAME COUNTRIES UNITED KINGDOM, BELGIUM AND GERMANY BUT THE PERCENTAGE WERE DIFFRENT AND IT WAS 25, 20 AND 13.

SECONDLY, CHINA GOT MORE GOODS FROM GERMANY IN THE YEAR OF 2000 AND 2011, IT WAS 38% AND 48%. AFTER THIS COUNTRIES LIKE AUSTRIA, BELGIM, FINLAN, FRANCE AND OTHER CONTRIBUTED 62% IN 2000 AND 53% IN 2011.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify the four charts’ subject and give a broad overview, correctly noting the UK’s leading share of exports to India in 2000 and Germany’s dominance in China. You also select some relevant figures, including Germany’s 38% and 48% shares in China. However, the overview is inaccurate when it says Germany was the largest exporter to India in 2011: Germany led at 25%, but the UK’s share was 13% and Belgium’s was 20%, so this part is correct only if the intended comparison is among the listed figures; the earlier ranking is also confused by the claim that the same three countries remained highest. More importantly, the India figures for 2011 are misassigned: 25%, 20% and 13% belong to Germany, Belgium and the UK, not the order stated. Several important changes and comparisons are omitted, leaving the report only partly developed.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction and overview are followed by separate paragraphs on India and China. Sequencing words such as “Firstly” and “Secondly” help signal the shift between destinations, and the reader can generally follow the main topic. However, the progression within the India paragraph is weakened by unclear references such as “these proportion were change” and by presenting the 2011 figures in an order that conflicts with the country order. The China paragraph then groups several countries together without explaining their individual shares, so the comparison is difficult to follow. Use clearer topic sentences and connect each figure directly to its country and year; this would make the organisation more consistently logical rather than relying mainly on basic sequencing markers.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some task-relevant vocabulary, including “exports,” “contributed,” “percentage” and “proportion,” and the country names make the subject clear. However, the range is limited and several word choices or collocations are inaccurate, sometimes making the meaning harder to interpret. For example, “the huge amount of goods were come from” is not a natural way to describe shares, while “got highest goods by” is unclear. There are also noticeable spelling errors, including “DEVIDED,” “DACADE,” “PRAPOTION,” “DIFFRENT” and “BELGIM.” Aim for precise chart language such as “accounted for,” “share,” “rose” and “fell,” and check spelling carefully. More accurate and varied vocabulary would help you describe the comparisons without relying on repeated general phrases.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple statements and longer sentences, and the overall meaning can usually be recovered. However, grammatical control is inconsistent, with frequent errors in verb forms, agreement, articles and sentence construction. For example, “the huge amount of goods were come” combines an incorrect verb form with faulty agreement, and “the percentage were different” should use a singular subject or a plural noun. The opening sentence also lacks a clear grammatical structure, while “in the year of 2000” and “after a decade this proportion were change” show problems with articles, prepositions and tense. Use shorter, complete sentences first, then practise accurate past-tense comparisons, such as “Germany’s share rose from 15% to 25%.” Check that each subject agrees with its verb and that each sentence has a clear main clause.

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.