Band 7.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 7.0 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-10-08

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 7.0)

The given chart compares the average percentage of weekly income spent by families in the year 1968 and the year 2018.

Overall, in the year 1968 largest proportion of weekly income was spent on food, conversely in the year 2018 leisure was the largest expense. Percentage of weekly income spent on household goods remained the same in both years. By contrast, fuel and power accounted for the smallest proportion in both years.

Regarding the year 1968, Food was the largest expense, roughly 35% of weekly income was spent on it, followed by housing and clothing and footwear at approximately 10%. Leisure, transport, personal goods, and household good nearly accounted for the same percentage of weekly income at around 8%. Least amount of money was spent on fuel and power, at 6%.

In the year 2018, weekly expendsire had changed drastically. Leisure now accounted for largest proportion at approximately 22% followed by housing at roughly 19%. Around 17% of weekly income was spent on food which was nearly the half of the percentage spent in the year 1968.Transport accounted 14% of total income. Proportion of money spent on household goods remained the same as in 1968, while money spent on personal goods, clothing and footwear, and fuel and power accounted for lowest, between 4% to 5%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.5

The response selects the main features accurately and gives a clear overview: food was the largest category in 1968, leisure led in 2018, household-goods spending was unchanged, and fuel and power was the smallest category in both years. The key figures are generally well reported, including food at about 35% and 17%, and leisure at 22% in 2018. Comparisons such as food spending being nearly halved are useful and supported by the chart. The account also covers the other categories, although the closing grouping of clothing, personal goods and fuel as the “lowest” is somewhat broad: their values differ, and clothing was 5% while the other two were 4%. More precise comparison of these smaller categories would strengthen an already well-focused summary.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The response is organised effectively into an introduction, an overview and two paragraphs comparing the years. Its progression from the main pattern to the individual figures is easy to follow, and linking expressions such as “Overall,” “By contrast” and “Regarding the year 1968” help signal relationships. The contrast between the leading categories in the two years is particularly clear. Some cohesion is less smooth where several categories are listed together, especially in the 1968 paragraph, and the final sentence groups three different figures without distinguishing them. A few transitions also feel formulaic. Use more precise links between related comparisons and vary the way you refer back to categories to make the progression more fluent.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

There is an adequate range of vocabulary for describing the chart, including “largest proportion,” “accounted for,” “followed by” and “remained the same.” These choices communicate the main comparisons clearly. However, some word choices and collocations are inaccurate or awkward, such as “weekly expendsire,” “weekly expendsire had changed drastically,” and “the half of the percentage.” “Household good” also uses the wrong form when referring to the category. Spelling errors such as “expendsire” reduce accuracy, while repeated use of “percentage” and “spent” limits flexibility. Aim for precise chart language—for example, “expenditure changed considerably” and “almost half the 1968 share”—and check spelling and category names carefully.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.5

The response uses a mix of simple and more complex structures, including contrast clauses (“while money spent on…”) and comparisons (“which was nearly the half…”). Meaning remains clear overall, but some grammatical errors persist. The opening overview needs an article and a clearer construction: “the largest proportion … was spent on food.” In “Food was the largest expense, roughly 35% …,” the comma joins two independent clauses and should be replaced with a semicolon or a linking word. There are also missing spaces after full stops and inconsistent capitalisation of “food.” The phrase “which was nearly the half” needs a more accurate grammatical form, such as “which was nearly half the 1968 figure.” Greater control of articles, clause boundaries and punctuation would build on the range already shown.

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.