Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-10-02

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 6.0)

The bar chart compares the the information about weekly spending of families in a particular nation in 1968 and 2018.

Overall, it is evident that in 1968, the highest income was spent on food, whereas the lowest income was spent on fuel and power. However, in 2018 the highest preference is given to leisure, while the lowest preference is given to personal goods and fuel and power.

In 1968, the food was accounted for 35% of weekly income. It was followed by housing and clothing and footware with 10% each. However, the income spent on household goods, personal goods and on transport were identical which was approximately 7%. The expenditure shelled out on leisure and on fuels were almost 9% and 6% respectively.

In 2018, the maximum amount of income was spent on leisure which was just over 20%. The expenditure done on fuels and on personal goods was almost same. Furthermore, the weekly income spent on food, housing and transport hovered under 25%. The lowest chunk of income was grabbed by household goods, clothing and footware.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

The response addresses all parts of the prompt by presenting an overview and reporting the main features of the two given years. However, some areas are handled more fully than others, and certain details are slightly inaccurate or vague. For instance, the student states that the highest income was spent on food and the lowest on fuel and power in 1968, which is generally correct, but in the body paragraphs, details such as saying 'the income spent on household goods, personal goods and on transport were identical which was approximately 7%' misrepresent the data where transport was actually 8% and household/personal goods were also 8%. Similarly, the overview in the final paragraph mentions that weekly income spent on food, housing, and transport 'hovered under 25%' for 2018, which is imprecise since food dropped to 17% while transport was 14%. Ideas are relevant, but some supporting data lacks the precision required for a higher band, leaving certain comparisons under-developed.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response achieves an overall coherent arrangement with a clear attempt to group information logically. It is divided into an introduction, an overview paragraph, and two distinct body paragraphs focusing separately on 1968 and 2018. However, cohesion is sometimes faulty or mechanical. Words like 'However' are used repeatedly in close succession, and referencing is not always clear, such as the abrupt transition in the final paragraph where multiple categories are lumped together rather than clearly contrasted. Paragraphing is used appropriately to separate the two time periods, but the logical progression within the body paragraphs occasionally stumbles due to imprecise signposting and grouping of data.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

The student demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, successfully incorporating terms like 'comparative', 'expenditure', 'identical', and 'maximum amount'. There are attempts to use less common vocabulary and phrasing, such as 'shelled out' and 'lowest chunk of income was grabbed by', though these demonstrate some awkwardness in style and register for an academic report. Furthermore, there are minor lexical errors and awkward collocations, such as 'footware' (spelling error) and 'the expenditure done on fuels', which indicate a developing rather than fully controlled lexical range. However, these vocabulary slips and minor inaccuracies do not impede overall communication.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

The writing displays a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, including comparative clauses and introductory prepositional phrases. There are some errors in grammar and punctuation, but they rarely impede communication. Examples of grammatical slips include article misuse ('compares the the information'), pluralisation and agreement issues ('the food was accounted for', 'the income spent on household goods, personal goods and on transport were identical'), and prepositional awkwardness ('expenditure shelled out on leisure and on fuels'). Despite these errors, the sentence forms show adequate variety, and the meaning remains clear throughout the report.

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.