Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · 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 5.5)

This pie graph illustrates the number of exports from different eu countries to china and India

Fisrt of all we will discuss about the export to india to india in 2000 and 2011.In 2000 the majority of exports were from uk and Belgium both contributing upto 54% of the exports of goods.Whereas the majority of exports in 2011 were from germany and again belgium whom bith combined made up 45% of the exports of goods but this time the number of exports from uk decreased to 13%

While for china in both years 2000 and 2011 the greater percentage of export was from germany which in 2000 was 38% and in 2011 inreased upto 48%.

In compsarison to india china mainly got its export of goods from one country.While india focused on mainting trade relation with different countries.Both contries got exports from the same eu countries but with different ratio

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify several important features, including the UK and Belgium’s combined 54% share of exports to India in 2000, Germany’s rise from 38% to 48% in exports to China, and the UK’s fall to 13% in India’s 2011 figures. The comparison that China relied more heavily on Germany while India’s exports were spread across more countries is also relevant. However, coverage is partial: there is no clear, complete overview of the main changes across both destinations, and several comparisons are omitted, such as Germany’s increase in India and the decline in Belgium’s share. The statement that India focused on “maintaining trade relation” is also an interpretation not directly established by these percentages. Select and summarise the key shifts more systematically.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a basic sequence: it discusses India first, then China, and ends with a comparison. This gives the reader some sense of organisation, and phrases such as “While for China” signal a change of focus. However, the progression is not consistently clear because the response is presented as one block and the opening repeats “to India.” Linking is limited and sometimes awkward, particularly “In comparison to India China mainly got its export of goods from one country.” The final comparison is broad rather than clearly connected to the figures already described. Use separate paragraphs for an overview and the two destinations, and connect comparisons explicitly—for example, contrast Germany’s share in China with the more distributed shares in India.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some relevant task vocabulary, including “majority,” “contributing,” “percentage,” and “combined,” which helps communicate the main figures. However, the range is limited and several choices are inaccurate or repetitive. “Number of exports” is unsuitable for percentages, while “got its export of goods from one country” reverses the relationship: the chart shows which countries supplied EU exports. Phrases such as “focused on maintaining trade relation” make an unsupported claim and are not precise descriptions of the data. There are also noticeable spelling errors, including “Fisrt,” “bith,” “inreased,” “compsarison,” and “contries.” Build a more precise vocabulary for shares and changes, and check spelling before submitting.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response attempts some longer sentence forms, including the contrast beginning “Whereas the majority of exports in 2011…” and the final comparison between India and China. However, the range is limited, and errors occur frequently enough to make parts of the response difficult to follow. For example, “In 2000 the majority of exports were from uk and Belgium both contributing…” lacks clear punctuation and sentence structure, while “which in 2000 was 38% and in 2011 increased…” has an unclear reference. The opening also has an incomplete sentence structure, and capitalisation of country names is inconsistent. Practise writing clear subject–verb sentences, then combine them with accurate contrast clauses and punctuation.

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.