Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Momentum Workout · 2026-10-11

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 5.0)

The pie charts illustrates the information about the EU exports of goods to India and China in the years 2000 and 2011 we can notice that the data is taken on gap of a decade.

Overall, we can notice that United kingdom and belgium accounts for the maximum contribution 29% and 25% respectively for the EU exports of goods to India in year 2000.

Whereas finland,sweden,spain and Austria all remained in the same proportion in the same year and others, netherlands. italy and france increased in the same.

For the same year exports to China are differentiable as Germany accounts for the maximum proportion (38%) whereas in India it less than its half and all the other countries plateaued

In the other year 2011 we can notice that share for Germany increased but for Belgium a drop is noticed and same for the United Kingdom and all others are approximately at same level for the country India. Similar trend is noticed for germany in china and similar to the other year trend .

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

You identify several important features, including the UK and Belgium as the largest contributors to India in 2000 and Germany’s leading share of exports to China. However, the response only partially summarises the charts: it gives little clear comparison between both years and leaves many key changes vague. For example, “all others are approximately at same level” overlooks notable movements, such as Germany rising from 15% to 25% for India and from 38% to 48% for China, while the UK falls in both markets. The claim that several countries “increased in the same” is unclear and does not specify the figures or direction accurately. A clearer overview of the main contrasts, supported by selected precise comparisons, would make the report more complete.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0

The response has some organisation: it begins with an introduction, then discusses 2000 and 2011, and uses transitions such as “Overall,” “Whereas,” and “In the other year.” However, progression is difficult to follow because several ideas are compressed into long, loosely connected sentences. The paragraph beginning “Whereas finland…” combines unchanged shares with increases without clearly separating the India data from the China data. “For the same year” also makes the reference to 2000 less precise, and the final sentence repeats “similar” without explaining which figures are being compared. Use separate, focused paragraphs for the overview and the two years or destinations, and make each comparison explicit. This would improve the flow and reduce reliance on broad linking phrases.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use some task-relevant vocabulary, including “exports,” “proportion,” “share,” “increased,” and “drop,” so the reader can recognise the topic and several trends. However, the range is limited and some choices are imprecise or unnatural. “Maximum contribution” is not the clearest way to describe a country’s share, while “plateaued” suggests a stable trend over time that is not established by these two snapshots. Phrases such as “differentiable” and “increased in the same” also make the intended meaning difficult to understand. Aim for precise chart language such as “accounted for,” “rose,” “fell,” and “remained unchanged,” and check spelling and capitalisation of country names. More accurate collocations would make your comparisons clearer.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

There are attempts to connect ideas in longer sentences, but control is inconsistent, and errors sometimes make relationships between figures unclear. The opening, “The pie charts illustrates,” has a subject–verb agreement error; it should be “charts illustrate.” The sentence beginning “Overall, we can notice that…” runs into the next idea without clear punctuation, and “Whereas finland…” is a fragment rather than a complete sentence. In “in India it less than its half,” the verb is missing, and the comparison structure is faulty. Sentence patterns are also repetitive, with frequent use of “we can notice.” Use complete sentences, check agreement and verb forms, and punctuate each main comparison clearly. A wider mix of accurate simple and complex sentences would improve readability.

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.