Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 4.5 · IELTS Momentum Workout · 2026-10-12
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 4.5)
The provided pie charts compare the percentages EU exports of goods to India and China In 2000 and 2011.
Overall, it can be seen that Germany recorded the highest percentage of exports of goods to China, while Belgium accounted for the highest proportion of EU exports of goods for India. It can also be notice that Sweden and Spain showed no variation in goods exports to India. United KIngdom ranked second and Australia accounted for lowest proportion across the decade.
In 2000, United Kingdom were exported 29% of goods to India, making it the highest category, while 13% exported in 2011.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 3.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 4.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.5 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 4.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 3.5
The response identifies the chart topic and attempts an overview, noting Germany’s leading share of exports to China and the UK’s decline in exports to India. However, the overview is partly inaccurate: Belgium was not the largest exporter to India in 2011, as Germany reached 25% compared with Belgium’s 20%; Belgium led only in 2000. The claim that Sweden and Spain showed no variation is also incorrect, since both shares rose in India, and “Australia” is not a category in the charts. Most figures and comparisons are omitted, and the response ends after one detail about India rather than summarising both destinations and years. It is 89 words, below the required 150, which further limits coverage. Add accurate key comparisons and a complete overview.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.5
There is a basic structure: an introductory sentence, an overview paragraph, and a detail paragraph. The opening also makes the subject clear, and “Overall” signals an attempt to distinguish the main features from supporting information. However, progression is very limited because the response stops after one comparison about India and does not organise details for both countries or both years. The overview combines several claims without a clear hierarchy, and the final sentence does not develop the preceding points. To improve, group information by destination or by year, then use clear links such as “By contrast” and “Meanwhile” to guide the reader through the comparisons. Ensure each paragraph has a distinct purpose.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.5
The response uses some appropriate chart vocabulary, including “percentages,” “accounted for,” “highest proportion,” and “ranked second.” These choices show an attempt to describe shares and rankings rather than simply list figures. However, several expressions are inaccurate or awkward, such as “percentage EU exports,” “showed no variation,” and “Australia accounted for lowest proportion”; the last also names a country absent from the chart. “Goods exports” is repeated, and the limited range makes the description imprecise. Check country names and use standard collocations such as “the share of EU exports” and “accounted for the smallest proportion.” More varied, accurate language for increases, decreases, and comparisons would make the report clearer.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0
The response includes a few controlled simple structures, such as “The provided pie charts compare…” and “Overall, it can be seen that…”. However, grammatical control is inconsistent, and the range is narrow. In “United Kingdom were exported 29% of goods,” the passive construction is incorrect; write “The UK accounted for 29% of exports” or “29% of exports went to India.” The phrase “while 13% exported in 2011” also lacks a clear subject and needs a suitable verb construction. There are agreement and article problems in “United Kingdom were” and “for India,” as well as inconsistent capitalisation. Practise accurate subject–verb patterns and use a mix of simple and complex sentences to report changes.
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.