Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-10-24

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 6.0)

The bar chart illustrates the percentage of weekly income spending on different categories in one country in 1968 and 2018.

Overall, a large amount of income was spend on food in 1968 year while spending on housing and leisure was higher in 2018. However, the percentages for other cateories were lower.

Looking at the details, food accounted for 35% in 1968 which was the highest recorded figure and gradually dropped to around 17% in 2018. Housing accounted for 10% in 1968 and increased to around 19 % in 2018. However, lowest spending was recorded for fuel and power around 6% in 1968 and 4% in 2018.

The percentage of clothing and footwear was 10% in 1968 which slightly decreased to 5% in 2018. The proportion of household goods stood at aroun 8% in both years. 8% and 4% recorded for personal goods. Almost 8% was seen for transport which rose to 14% in 2018. Spending on leisure was 9% in 1968 and gradually increased to around 22% in 2018 which was common catteory in that year.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You identify the main contrast: food was the largest category in 1968, while leisure and housing took larger shares in 2018. Most figures are reported accurately, including food (35% to 17%), housing (10% to 19%), and leisure (9% to 22%). The overview also notes that several other categories declined. This gives the response a clear account of the chart’s central changes. To make the summary more complete and precise, clarify that leisure—not housing—was the largest category in 2018, and avoid calling fuel and power the lowest in both years: household, personal, and transport spending were also around 8% in 1968, while personal goods was 4% in 2018. Some comparisons are listed without being fully interpreted.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a coherent overall arrangement: an introduction, a brief overview, and two detail paragraphs. The categories are generally grouped in a sensible order, and linking words such as “Overall,” “However,” and “Looking at the details” help signal the stages of the report. However, cohesion is sometimes mechanical, particularly through repeated sentence patterns such as “accounted for” and “was…in 1968…in 2018.” The final paragraph also moves through several categories in quick succession, making the comparisons feel list-like. Improve progression by grouping categories that rose together and those that fell or remained stable, and use clearer references when moving between them.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of chart vocabulary, including “accounted for,” “proportion,” “percentage,” and “stood at,” and the meaning is generally clear. There are also some inaccurate or awkward choices that limit precision: “a large amount of income was spend” is not a natural collocation, “gradually dropped” suggests a process over time rather than a comparison between two years, and “common catteory” does not express the intended idea. Spelling slips such as “cateories,” “aroun,” and “catteory” also reduce accuracy. Aim for precise reporting verbs such as “fell,” “rose,” and “remained stable,” and check spelling and collocations carefully.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple sentences and some more developed structures, including relative clauses such as “which was the highest recorded figure” and contrast introduced by “while.” Most sentences remain understandable, but some grammatical errors are noticeable. For example, “was spend” has an incorrect verb form, and “in 1968 year” uses an unnecessary noun and article pattern. The fragment “8% and 4% recorded for personal goods” lacks a clear subject and finite verb, while “Almost 8% was seen for transport” has an awkward passive construction. Work on complete sentence structure and accurate past-tense forms, while varying sentence patterns to connect comparisons more smoothly.

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.