Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 4.5 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-10-09

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 4.5)

The table show the summarise information about the main features , and comparison between two years 1968 and 2018 . The people in 1968 do not have beautifil houses they just live their lifes in a simple way . As compared to the next generation .

In, 1968 the people mostly focus on the food the rate of the food is high as compared to all the things which are below. The families in 1968 weekly spent more money on there. they bought personal goods for thereselfs. The transport in 1968 is not that better so they use fewer transport.

On the other hand, the families ib 2018 do not spent much money because they save money for their future life. They also do not spend much money in the clothes. The rate of transport or housing is high in 2018. The transport in 2018 is better than previous years.

In conclusion , the people of 1968 spent more their weekly income. They care about thereselfs .

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.0

The response identifies a few relevant broad patterns, including that food was the largest spending category in 1968 and that housing and transport were prominent in 2018. However, it only minimally reports the chart: most categories are omitted, and there is no clear, accurate overview of the main changes. Several explanations are invented rather than supported by the data, such as saying families saved for the future or that transport was better in 2018. The statement that people in 1968 spent more of their weekly income is also misleading: food spending fell substantially, while leisure, housing and transport rose. Focus on describing the proportions and comparing the largest increases and decreases, without speculating about people’s motives or living conditions.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.5

The response has a basic paragraph structure and uses simple signposts such as “On the other hand” and “In conclusion,” so the reader can recognise an attempt to organise the answer. However, the progression is weak because the paragraphs do not consistently group or compare chart information. The opening shifts into unsupported comments about houses and lifestyles, and the conclusion repeats a vague claim rather than summarising the chart’s main trends. Some links are also unclear, as in “The families in 1968 weekly spent more money on there,” where the reference is difficult to follow. Organise the response around the two years or, more effectively, around categories that rose and fell, and use clear references to the figures.

Lexical Resource: Band 4.5

Vocabulary is basic and repetitive, with frequent reliance on general words such as “things,” “money,” “high” and “better.” Some chart-related terms are used, including “weekly income,” “food,” “transport” and “rate,” but “rate” is not the most precise way to describe a spending share. Spelling and word-form errors—such as “beautifil,” “thereselfs” and “there”—also reduce accuracy. Several expressions are unnatural or unclear, including “they save money for their future life” and “spent more their weekly income.” Build a more precise range for describing proportions and change, such as “accounted for,” “share,” “rose,” “fell” and “remained unchanged,” and check spelling carefully.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

The response relies mainly on short, simple sentence patterns, with little accurate variety in complex structures. Errors occur frequently in verb forms, agreement, articles and sentence construction: “The table show” should be “The chart shows,” “do not spent” should be “did not spend,” and “The families in 1968 weekly spent more money on there” is incomplete or unclear. Punctuation and spacing are also inconsistent, as in “In, 1968” and the spaces before commas and full stops. These problems sometimes make the intended meaning difficult to follow. Practise forming accurate past-tense comparisons and complete sentences, for example, “Families spent 35% on food in 1968, compared with 17% in 2018.”

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.