Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-10-13

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 5.0)

The chart illustrates the details about how average income weekly spending by families in their specific country in the years 1968 and 2018.

Overall, the percentage spending income on food is remain high in early year. The portion of fuel and power, clothing and footwear, and personal goods is lower.

In the year 1968, the ratio of outlying weekly income on food is 35 and in year 2018 it is about 17%. On the other hand, the fuel and power is remain lower in both years with 7% of difference. The percentage of personal goods is roundabout 7 percent in year 1968 and it is almost 5% in 2018.

The fraction spending income on housing is 10% in early year and it is increased almost 14%. The spending percentage on clothing and footwear is also 10% in 1968 and it is become low about 5% in 2018.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

You identify the two years and report several relevant categories, including food, housing, fuel and power, personal goods, and clothing. However, the response covers only part of the chart: it omits leisure, transport, and household goods, and gives no clear overview of the main changes across the categories. Some figures are inaccurate: housing in 2018 is about 19%, not 14%, and fuel and power differs by about 2 percentage points, not 7. The overview also says food spending “remain high” without clearly stating that it fell substantially. The response is 147 words, below the required 150. To improve, add a concise overview and select the largest rises and falls, reporting the figures accurately.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a basic, recognisable structure: an introduction, an overview, and two paragraphs of details. This helps the reader follow the broad sequence from general comments to figures. However, progression is limited because the overview does not clearly summarise the main contrasts, and the details are presented as separate observations rather than grouped comparisons. Linking phrases such as “On the other hand” and “also” provide some connection, but the relationships between categories and years are not always clear. For example, the fuel sentence refers to a “7% of difference” without specifying the two values. Grouping categories that rose or fell, and using clearer comparisons between 1968 and 2018, would make the organisation more coherent.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some task-relevant vocabulary, including “percentage,” “ratio,” “fraction,” and category names, so the reader can generally understand the subject. However, the range is limited and several expressions are unnatural or imprecise, such as “average income weekly spending,” “outlying weekly income,” and “spending income.” These choices sometimes make the intended meaning difficult to interpret. “Roundabout” is also not an appropriate way to introduce an approximate figure in this context, and “the portion … is lower” does not clearly indicate whether the figures fell or were simply small. Aim for standard chart language and accurate collocations, such as “share of weekly expenditure,” “accounted for,” and “approximately.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response uses mostly simple sentence patterns, with a few attempts to connect ideas using “and” and “on the other hand.” However, frequent errors in verb forms and sentence construction reduce accuracy. For example, “the percentage spending income on food is remain high” combines incompatible verb forms, while “the fuel and power is remain lower” repeats this problem. In “it is increased almost 14%,” the tense and structure are also faulty. Articles and prepositions are sometimes missing or awkward, as in “in early year” and “in year 2018.” These errors do not prevent the reader from understanding every point, but they make the writing less clear. Practise accurate past-tense comparisons and simple patterns such as “spending on X was…” and “the figure rose to…”.

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.