Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Complete Catalyst · 2026-09-05

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The table below gives information about the five small companies in Britain that came top in a survey of staff conducted by a national newspaper to find out which companies are the best to work for.

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

THE FIVE BEST SMALL COMPANIES TO WORK FOR

Student answer (Band 5.0)

The tabular chart gives the information about the five small companies in the England which are on peak according to the survey in conducting employees by a national newspaper which highlights the best companies at their work. while fifth company hires the maximum staff , minimum ratio of in high income bracket.

Interestingly, company which are on fifth rank illustrated triple ratio in staff conducting rather than first company. whereas rest of the companies showed similarity in staff numbers. Moreover, while,33%of staff turnover witnessed in fifth company , 18% by second company. Also, third company illustrated 74:26 ratio of male and female staff while first company witnessed the half ratio.

In addition, there are 93%/0% and 82% /0% ratio accounted in the employees who were under 35s/ over 55s by firth and second company, respectively. Moreover, minimum ratio of staff in high income bracket showed in fourth and fifth company .

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0

The response attempts to summarise the data, but it fails to provide a clear overview of the main trends. The information is presented in a fragmented manner, making it difficult for the reader to identify the key features of the five companies. While some data points are mentioned, such as staff turnover and age demographics, the comparisons are often confusing or inaccurate (e.g., 'triple ratio in staff conducting'). The lack of a clear summary and the inclusion of confusing data points mean the response does not fully address the requirements of the task. The information is not well-selected, and the overall message is unclear.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0

The response lacks logical progression. While there is an attempt to use cohesive devices like 'Interestingly', 'whereas', and 'Moreover', they are often used incorrectly or do not help the flow of ideas. The paragraphing is weak, and the sentences feel disjointed. Referencing is frequently unclear, making it difficult to follow which company is being discussed. The overall structure is mechanical, and the lack of clear transitions between the different data points hinders the reader's ability to grasp the information presented.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.0

The vocabulary is limited and often misused. Phrases like 'staff conducting' and 'triple ratio' are not standard English and do not accurately describe the data. There is a lack of precision in describing trends or comparisons. The student relies on basic terminology and struggles to use academic vocabulary effectively. Some terms are used in ways that impede meaning, such as 'witnessed the half ratio'. To improve, the student needs to focus on using precise terminology related to data analysis and improving their grasp of collocations.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0

The response contains frequent grammatical errors, including issues with articles, subject-verb agreement, and sentence structure. For example, 'the tabular chart gives the information' and 'minimum ratio of staff in high income bracket showed' are grammatically incorrect. Punctuation is also problematic, with inconsistent spacing and misuse of symbols like '93%/0%'. The range of structures is very limited, and the errors are frequent enough to cause difficulty for the reader. The student needs to focus on basic sentence construction and proofreading for common grammatical slips.

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.