Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-08-04

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The chart below gives information about how families in one country spent their weekly income in 1968 and in 2018.

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

1968 and 2018: average weekly spending by families

Student answer (Band 5.0)

The bar graph compares how the average household in a specific nation distributed their weekly earnings in 1968 to 2018.

Overall, it is clear that while spending on food and leisure saw significant increases over the period, expenditure on fuel and power experienced a dramatic decline. Additionally, food remained the highest expense for households in both years.

In 1968, the food registered the highest figure for household expensive at overwhelming 35%. closely followed by housing and clothing and foot ware at 10%.

conversely, domestic unit spent significantly less on fuel and power at 7% respectively. while other three categories spent relatively stable amount ranging from roughly 8%.

In 2018, leisure accounted for the largest category throught the time period. by contrast food shows a significantly decline up to 17%. while fuel and power and personal goods remained unchanged throught the period. moreover housing experienced upward trend until 19% final spent, another two categories drop sharply, around 9% and 14%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0

The response covers the main features of the data, but there are significant inaccuracies in the reporting of the figures. For example, you state that food was the highest expense in 2018, yet the chart shows leisure as the highest category. Additionally, you claim fuel and power remained unchanged, which contradicts the visual data showing a decline. While you attempt to identify trends, the misinterpretation of the data points prevents a higher score. To improve, ensure you carefully cross-reference your statements with the provided graph to ensure factual accuracy.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5

The essay is organised into paragraphs, which helps the reader follow the structure. You use some cohesive devices like 'Overall', 'Additionally', and 'In contrast', which provide a basic framework. However, the progression of ideas is sometimes hindered by unclear referencing and awkward phrasing, such as 'another two categories drop sharply'. The logical flow is occasionally disrupted by the factual errors mentioned in the task achievement section. Improving the use of linking words to connect sentences more fluidly would enhance the overall coherence.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.0

You demonstrate an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, using terms like 'distributed', 'expenditure', and 'accounted for'. However, there are several instances of word-choice errors and awkward collocations, such as 'household expensive' instead of 'household expenses' and 'foot ware' instead of 'footwear'. Some phrasing is repetitive, and the misuse of terms like 'domestic unit' to refer to spending habits limits the precision of your writing. Focusing on accurate word forms and standard collocations will help you achieve a higher band score.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0

The response contains a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, but there are frequent grammatical errors that occasionally impede clarity. Issues include incorrect article usage ('the food registered'), subject-verb agreement errors, and punctuation mistakes, such as starting sentences with lowercase letters. The use of prepositions is also inconsistent, for example, 'decline up to 17%'. While the meaning is generally understandable, the frequency of these errors suggests a need for more careful proofreading and a stronger grasp of basic grammatical rules.

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.