Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · IELTS Momentum Workout · 2026-10-28

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 6.0)

The pie chart illustrates the exports from numerous EU countries to China and India in 2000 and 2011. Overall, UK had the highest percent of exports to India and Germany had the highest exports to China.

UK had the highest exports in 2000 to India which was 29% that decreased to 13% in 2011. The least exports were from Austria which was 1% in 2000 and 2% in 2011. Belgium had 25% in 2000 and 20% in 2011. Sweden, Finland and Spain had 2% of exports of goods to India in 2000 whereas they had 3%, 2%, 3% of exports in 2011 respectively. The exports from UK decreased gradually throughout the years whereas the exports from Germany increased.

Germany had the highest export percentage to China in both 2000 and 2011 which was 38% and 48% respectively. Spain and Austria had the least percent which was 2% in 2000 which remained same for Austria in 2011 and Spain increased to 3%. Italy and UK had 9% of exports in 2000 which became 7% for UK and 8% for Italy in 2011. Belgium had the same percentage in both years which was 5%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You identify the main leaders in each market and report several accurate figures, including the UK’s fall in India from 29% to 13% and Germany’s rise in China from 38% to 48%. The response also notes useful changes for Belgium and Italy. However, the overview is brief and does not capture the broader contrast: India’s exports were more distributed among leading countries, while China was dominated by Germany, increasingly so in 2011. Some details are incomplete or imprecise: the claim that the UK’s share decreased “gradually” is unsupported by two snapshots, and the least-exporting countries in India are not consistently identified across both years. A clearer overview and more selective comparisons across both destinations would develop the report more fully.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a clear overall arrangement: an introduction and overview are followed by separate discussion of India and China. This makes the destination-based comparisons easy to follow, and linking words such as “whereas,” “which,” and “in both 2000 and 2011” help connect figures. The progression is generally coherent, though some links are mechanical and the India paragraph moves through individual countries without a strong hierarchy of importance. For example, the sentence listing Sweden, Finland and Spain gives several small figures but does not connect them to the main pattern. To strengthen progression, group countries by notable increases, decreases or stable shares, and use clearer references when comparing years.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of task-related vocabulary, including “exports,” “percentage,” “decreased,” “increased,” and “remained same,” so the data is generally understandable. There are also attempts to describe change and compare categories. However, some phrasing is repetitive or imprecise: “had the highest exports” is repeated, and “highest percent of exports” is less natural than describing the largest share. “Decreased gradually” also suggests a pattern over time that the two chart years do not establish. Use more precise terms such as “accounted for,” “share,” “rose,” and “fell,” while varying sentence phrasing. More accurate collocations would make the report sound more controlled and help distinguish a country’s share from the total volume of exports.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple sentences and some more complex structures, including comparisons with “whereas” and relative clauses such as “which was 29% that decreased to 13%.” Most meanings remain clear, but some sentence construction and grammatical control are uneven. In that example, the relative clause is awkwardly attached; a clearer form would be “The UK’s share was 29% in 2000, before falling to 13% in 2011.” The overview also omits an article in “Overall, UK had,” and “which was 38% and 48%” does not agree smoothly with the plural figures. Check articles, clause attachment and agreement, and use a wider range of accurately controlled comparison structures. These refinements would improve clarity without changing the report’s basic organisation.

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.