Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-08-27
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 illustrates information about, How families spent their weekly income in 1968 and 2018.
By having a cursory glance, it is crystal clear that in 1968 indivisouls spent. 40% of their weekly income on beverages but in the year 2018, there is a fall in it. only 18% of weekly income is spent by the peoples. moreover, in housing 10% of their weekly income is spent. But in year 2018, peoples spent 18% of their weekly revenue on housing. Therefore there is a appreciation of 8% on rent. furthermore, on fuel and electricity. only a little number of 4% is spent on petroleum and power and in 2018, percentage increased by 2%. By moving ahead, only 10% income is spent on cloths and footware. But in 2018, it will reduced by 5%. Then on household items. it will be 8% from 1968 to 2018 and 8% on personal use in 1968 but only 4% in 2018. so the percentage for own products is fell from 8 to 4 %.then on travelling t in 1968. there will be 8% of a persons weekly income. but in 2018 nearly 14 % revenue is spend on transportation. in the last 8% money spent on leisure in 1968. but in 2018 it will be grow up to 22 % of a persons weekly income,
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0
The response covers the main features of the data, such as the significant changes in food/beverage and leisure spending. However, the report lacks a clear overview or summary of the most significant trends, which is a requirement for Band 6 and above. The information is presented as a list of individual data points rather than a comparative analysis. While the key figures are mentioned, the lack of synthesis and the inclusion of some inaccurate interpretations (e.g., describing a 4% increase in fuel as 'increased by 2%') limit the effectiveness of the response. To improve, focus on grouping related data and highlighting the most striking differences between the two years.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0
The response lacks paragraphing, which is essential for a clear structure. While some cohesive devices like 'moreover', 'furthermore', and 'therefore' are used, they are often placed awkwardly or used to connect disparate points that do not follow a logical progression. The flow is mechanical, and the lack of clear topic sentences makes it difficult for the reader to follow the comparison. To improve, organize the data into logical paragraphs—for example, one for categories that increased and one for those that decreased—and ensure that cohesive devices are used to link ideas rather than just starting new sentences.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The vocabulary is somewhat limited and repetitive. There are several spelling errors, such as 'indivisouls' (individuals), 'cloths' (clothes), and 'footware' (footwear). The word choice is often imprecise, such as using 'appreciation' to describe an increase in spending, which is not appropriate in this context. The phrasing 'cursory glance' is also overly informal for an Academic Task 1 report. To reach a higher band, focus on using more precise terminology for describing trends, such as 'expenditure', 'proportion', 'fluctuated', or 'remained stable', and ensure accurate spelling of basic terms.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0
The response contains frequent grammatical errors that occasionally impede clarity. There are issues with sentence boundaries, such as fragments and run-on sentences (e.g., 'In 1968 indivisouls spent. 40%...'). Tense usage is inconsistent, frequently switching between past and future ('it will reduced', 'it will be grow up'), which is inappropriate for describing historical data. Punctuation is also problematic, with many sentences ending prematurely or containing unnecessary periods. To improve, focus on mastering basic sentence structure, ensuring consistent use of the past tense for historical data, and avoiding sentence fragments.
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.