Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-09-03

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 5.5)

The chart illustrates the weekly spending of families in a particular country during 1968 and 2018 in various items.

Overall, it demonstrates the percentage of weekly income of families spent in 8 different items in those years.

In 1968, they spent significant portion of their earning on food which is 35% which dramatically goes down to less than 20% in 2018. Housing in 1968 took 10% of their weekly income while this number increased to slightly less then 20% in 2018. Average weekly spending on fuel and power products was slightly more than 5% in 1968 and it shrinks down to less then 5% in 2018. 10% income spent on clothing and footwear in the year 1968 which cuts down to half in 2018.

Additionally, Household goods remained constant during both years. spending on personal goods was same as household goods in 1968 but this value goes down to less then 5% in 2018. Families spent more than 5% on their weekly income on transport in 1968: However, this value almost touched 15% in 2018. Leisure covered prominent part of income in 2018 which is more than 20% but this number was less than 10% in 1968.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.0

The response covers all parts of the task by identifying the main trends and comparing the data between 1968 and 2018. The overview is present, though it could be more analytical by highlighting the most significant shifts (e.g., the dramatic decline in food spending versus the rise in leisure). While the data is generally accurate, some descriptions are slightly imprecise, such as stating household goods remained constant when the chart shows a minor fluctuation. The response provides a clear summary of the key features, meeting the requirements for a Band 6.5, but it lacks the depth of analysis required for a higher band.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5

The response is logically organized, with an introduction, an overview, and body paragraphs. However, the progression of ideas is somewhat mechanical. The use of cohesive devices is limited; for instance, the transition 'However' is used correctly, but the paragraphing is unbalanced, with a very long second paragraph that could have been split for better readability. Referencing is generally clear, but the flow between sentences could be improved by using a wider variety of linking words to connect the data points more fluidly.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

The vocabulary is adequate for the task, allowing the writer to describe trends (e.g., 'dramatically goes down', 'remained constant'). However, there is a lack of variety and some inaccuracies in word choice, such as 'prominent part of income' instead of 'a significant proportion of income'. There are also minor spelling errors like 'then' instead of 'than'. To reach a higher band, the student should incorporate more precise academic collocations and avoid repetitive phrasing.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

The response uses a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. While the meaning is generally clear, there are frequent grammatical errors, particularly with verb tenses and prepositions (e.g., 'spending on personal goods was same as household goods' should be 'the same as'). There are also issues with subject-verb agreement and article usage (e.g., 'spent significant portion'). These errors do not impede communication, but they are frequent enough to prevent a higher score. More attention to sentence structure and proofreading for basic errors is needed.

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.