Band 7.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 7.0 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-10-20

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 bar graph illustrates the average weekly spending by families in one nation between 1968 and 2018.

Overall, the average spending on food was the largest in 1968, followed by clothing and footwear and housing. Families spent mostly on leisure, housing and transport in 2018. However, equal share of weekly income was spent on household goods in both years.

In 1968, around 35% of weekly income was spent on food, making it the largest spending of the year, whereas spending fell dramatically at almost 17% in 2018. The opposite pattern was seen in leisure, the average weekly spending was around 9% in 1968, which rose significantly at rougly 22 % in 2018. Furthermore, housing comprised of total 10% spending in 1968, before climibing to around 19% in 2018.

The spending on fuel and power were the least common in both years, following 6% in 1968 and around 4% in 2018, whereas families spent equally on household goods at rougly 7% in both years. Almost 8% was spent on transport in 1968, which then increased significantly in 2018, at around 14%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

The response selects the main comparisons and gives a clear overview: food was the largest category in 1968, while leisure, housing and transport were prominent in 2018, and household-goods spending was unchanged. Most figures are accurately reported, including food (35% to about 17%), leisure (9% to about 22%), housing (10% to about 19%) and transport (8% to about 14%). The overview’s claim that clothing and footwear ranked second in 1968 is not supported by the chart: it was tied with housing at 10%, below neither category. The statement that fuel and power was the least common in both years is also inaccurate for 2018, when personal goods was equally low at 4%. More precise ranking and coverage of the other notable changes would strengthen an otherwise well-focused summary.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The information is organised effectively into an introduction, an overview and two detail paragraphs. The progression from the broad pattern to comparisons between categories is easy to follow, and linking expressions such as “whereas,” “Furthermore” and “The opposite pattern” help connect contrasts. The final paragraph groups the smaller categories and transport, which gives the report a sensible structure. Some connections could be made more precise: “following 6%” does not clearly express the comparison, and the sentence about fuel and power combines its ranking with household goods in a way that slightly blurs the relationship between the figures. Clearer transitions and more exact referencing would make the cohesion more consistently smooth.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.5

The response uses a suitable range of vocabulary for describing chart data, including “fell dramatically,” “rose significantly,” “comprised” and “increased.” These choices allow the main movements to be communicated clearly, and the writer varies the wording rather than relying only on “spent.” However, some collocations and word forms are inaccurate or awkward, such as “the largest spending of the year,” “housing comprised of total 10% spending” and “the least common.” There are also spelling errors in “rougly” and “climibing,” and the chart label is “footwear,” not “footware.” These do not prevent understanding, but greater precision and proofreading are needed for more flexible, natural vocabulary use.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.5

There is a useful mix of simple and complex sentence forms, including clauses with “whereas,” “which” and “before,” and most of the comparisons remain understandable. Some grammatical errors persist, however. In “equal share of weekly income,” the article is missing; “The spending on fuel and power were” has a subject–verb agreement error; and “housing comprised of” uses an incorrect grammatical pattern. The sentence “the average weekly spending was around 9% in 1968, which rose” also has an unclear relative-clause reference, since “which” appears to refer to spending rather than the figure. Review articles, agreement and clause construction, while retaining the varied sentence structures already attempted.

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.