Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 4.5 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-10-22

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)

In the chart demonstarte that families in one country spent their weekly income in 1968 and in 2018.

In 1968, the families spent there 35% weekly salary on food, as we compare with 2018 the families spent there salary approximatley 17% . As we see the average of housing, in 1968 the families spent 10% of weekly salary, as we compare to 2018 the families spent approximatley 19% of weekly salary. And we see average of fuel and power, in 1968 the families spent 6% of weekly salary on fuel and power, as we compare the average of 2018, the families spent 4% of weekly salray on fuel and power. Average of clothing and footware, in 1968 the average of clothing and footware the families spent 10% weekly salary on it, as we compare the average of 2018 the families spent 5% weekly salary on it. In 1968 families spent 8% of weekly salary on household goods and there is same average in 2018. In 1968, the families spent 8% of weekly salary on personal goods in 2018, they spent 4% of salary on it. In 1968 the families spent 8% of salary on transport in 2018, the familes spent 14% of salary on it. In 1968, they spent 9% of salary on leisure in 2018, they spent 22% of salary on leisure

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

You report figures for all eight categories, and most are consistent with the chart: for example, food falls from 35% to about 17%, while leisure rises from 9% to 22%. However, the response mainly lists individual values rather than selecting and highlighting the main features. It lacks a clear overview of the broad shift from food and clothing towards leisure, housing and transport, and it does not identify the largest or smallest spending categories across the years. Some comparisons are also unclear, such as “In 1968 families spent 8% ... on personal goods in 2018,” where the change to 4% is not expressed cleanly. A concise overview and more emphasis on key contrasts would make the summary more complete.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.0

The categories are presented in a generally understandable sequence, and repeated references to 1968 and 2018 help readers follow the comparisons. However, the response is one long paragraph with no clear introduction, overview, or grouping of related information. The repeated frame “as we compare” makes the progression mechanical, while several links between years and figures are awkward or ambiguous, particularly in the personal-goods sentence. Grouping categories that rose together and those that fell or stayed stable would create a clearer progression. Use separate paragraphs for an overview and the detailed comparisons, and vary linking expressions so that relationships are explicit rather than repeatedly signposted in the same way.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use relevant topic vocabulary, including “weekly income,” “housing,” “fuel and power,” and “household goods,” so the reader can identify the spending categories. However, the range is limited and several phrases are repeated, especially “the families spent” and “as we compare.” There are also noticeable spelling errors, such as “demonstarte,” “approximatley,” “salray,” “footware,” and “familes.” These do not usually prevent understanding, but they reduce precision and polish. Aim for more varied, accurate reporting language, such as “accounted for,” “rose to,” and “declined to,” and check the spelling of chart labels before submitting.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response communicates the basic comparisons through mostly simple sentence patterns, and the repeated use of past-tense reporting is generally understandable. However, the range of structures is limited, and attempts to connect clauses often produce faulty or incomplete sentences. The opening, “In the chart demonstarte that families…,” lacks a grammatical subject and a correctly formed verb. In “In 1968 families spent 8% ... on personal goods in 2018, they spent 4%,” two independent clauses are joined without suitable punctuation or a conjunction. Articles and possessive forms are also often missing, as in “spent there salary.” Practise accurate comparative sentences and use full stops or conjunctions to separate ideas.

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.