Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Complete Catalyst · 2026-10-14

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 5.5)

The table chart illustrates the five best companies in Britain that came top in suvery of staff conducted by national newspaper, whereas it compared with five different position.

Overall, the proportion of the number of staff and staff turnover considerably highest in 5th company, while staff in high income bracket was recorded the lowest in 5th company.

To begin with, the proportion of the number of staff was least at 56 people, followed by 79, 72, 76 by 2nd, 3rd and 4th company respectively, whereas it increased to 190 people in 5th company. Moreover, the ratio of male-female staff was quite fluctuated, where the proportion of male-female was 74:26 in 3rd company, followed by 13:87 in 4th company it showes the male was highest in 3rd and in 4th female contributed largest time. Turning to under 35 they accounted lowest at 26% in 4rd, however highest accounted for 93% in 5th respectively, but over 55 has been performed in 2nd and 4th company, at 1% and 8% respectively.

In addition, staff turnover at just 5% in 1st, whereas it increased to 18% 2nd, despite some fluctuations in 3rd and 4th it reached to 33% in 5th company. In contrast, staff in high income bracket was contributed least at 2% as compared with staff turnover was reported higher in the same company. Furthermore, 3rd company accounted at 74% which was higher than 5th, however, in 2nd, 3rd and 5th was comprised to 34%, 48, and 5% respectively.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify several relevant comparisons, including the largest workforce in fifth place (190) and its low high-income share (2%), and you note that third place has the highest high-income figure (74%). However, the overview is incomplete and partly inaccurate: staff numbers are not a proportion, and the fifth company does not have the highest turnover (33% is highest, but the overview should distinguish this from workforce size). Some figures are misreported or assigned incorrectly. For example, the workforce sequence after 56 should be 79, 72 and 76 for second to fourth place, but your wording makes the order unclear; the final income comparison gives incorrect values and rankings. Select the clearest contrasts and check each figure against its column to make the summary more accurate and complete.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, an overview, and two paragraphs covering the table’s details. This gives the reader a basic route through the information. However, progression within the detail paragraphs is uneven, and several comparisons are difficult to follow because the links between figures and companies are unclear. For instance, the sentence beginning “Moreover, the ratio of male-female staff” moves between third and fourth place without clearly presenting the full pattern, while “Furthermore” introduces a confusing and inaccurate income comparison. Some connectors, such as “whereas,” “however,” and “in contrast,” are used mechanically or do not express the relationship precisely. Group related data more consistently and use clear company labels alongside each comparison.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use some task-relevant vocabulary, including “staff turnover,” “high income bracket,” “ratio,” and “accounted,” and you attempt to vary language when comparing the companies. However, the range is limited by repeated or imprecise expressions, and several collocations make the meaning awkward, such as “the proportion of the number of staff,” “female contributed largest time,” and “was comprised to.” There are also spelling errors, including “suvery” and “showes,” which reduce accuracy. Choose direct terms for the data: “number of employees,” “female staff made up the largest share,” and “accounted for.” More precise comparison verbs and accurate spelling would make the report clearer and more natural.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and complex sentences, using clauses with “whereas,” “while,” and “however.” Nevertheless, complex sentences are often faulty, and errors frequently make relationships between figures harder to understand. For example, “the proportion of the number of staff was least at 56 people” has an awkward grammatical construction, while “it increased to 18% 2nd” lacks a clear preposition and company reference. The sentence beginning “despite some fluctuations” is also incomplete in its comparison structure. Articles and agreement are inconsistent, as in “in 5th company” and “over 55 has been performed.” Build shorter, complete sentences first, then add subordinate clauses, checking verb forms, articles, and prepositions.

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.