Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-09-30

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 how families in one country spent their weekly income in 1968 and in 2018.

Overall, it is clear that families spent a large proportion of their weekly income on food in 1968, while in 2018 they began to spend more on leisure.

In 1968, families spent 35% of their income on food. They use 10% of their income on housing, clothing and footwear. They consume 8% of their income on transport, household goods and personal goods. Least amount of their income which is only 6% used on fuel and power. They use 9% income for leisure.

In 2018, spending rate of their weekly income for food is reduced from 35% to 17%. They use only 4% on personal goods, fuel and power. Income requirement for housing is increased from 10% to 19%. Now they utilize 5% of their income on clothing and footwear while 19% for transport. Maximun proportion of their income accounted for leisure. Income requirement for Household goods remained same..

AI examiner evaluation

CriterionBand
Task Achievement / Task Response5.5
Coherence and Cohesion5.5
Lexical Resource5.5
Grammatical Range and Accuracy5.5
Overall5.5

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

The student successfully addresses all parts of the task by reporting the main features of weekly family spending in 1968 and 2018 and making relevant comparisons. The overview captures the main contrast well, noting the shift from food to leisure. Key data points are accurately cited, such as the drop in food spending from 35% to 17% and the rise in leisure to 22%. However, there are some minor inaccuracies and awkward phrasings in reporting specific minor categories (e.g., transport is misstated as 19% in the text when the chart shows 14%). Despite this minor data reading error, the response covers all categories adequately and presents a clear picture of the visual data, meeting the requirements for a Band 6.5 to 7.0, ultimately fitting a solid Band 6.0 due to some under-developed comparisons.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The essay has a coherent overall arrangement with a clear introduction and separate body paragraphs dedicated to each year (1968 and 2018). However, paragraphing is somewhat weak, as the 1968 data is lumped into a single block of choppy sentences without sufficient grouping. Cohesive devices are minimal and sometimes repetitive (e.g., starting multiple consecutive sentences with 'They...'). Progression is clear between the two time periods, but the internal flow within paragraphs feels mechanical rather than naturally fluent. Referencing is generally clear, but the lack of varied linking words limits the cohesion score to a Band 6.0.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

The student uses an adequate range of vocabulary suitable for the task, incorporating terms such as 'proportion', 'spending rate', and 'utilize'. There are attempts at less common vocabulary, but some word choices are awkward or inaccurate, such as 'consume 8% of their income' or 'Least amount of their income... used on fuel'. Additionally, there are minor repetition issues with basic verbs like 'spend' and 'use'. While communication is never impeded, the lexical control lacks the precision and flexibility required for Band 7.0, making Band 6.0 a fair and accurate assessment.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

The response features a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, though simple structures dominate. There are several noticeable grammatical errors, particularly with verb tense consistency and prepositions, such as 'They use 10% of their income' (when describing 1968 past events) and 'Income requirement for Household goods remained same' (missing article). Another error includes 'Maximun proportion of their income accounted for' (awkward passive construction). Although these errors do not impede overall communication, they occur frequently enough to prevent the essay from reaching Band 6.5, placing it firmly at Band 5.5.

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.