Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-10-29

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 graph illustrates the information about how households in one nation spent their weekly earning during 1968 and 2018.

Overall, spending on food decreased in considerably, whereas expenditure on housing, transport, leisure increased. Food was the largest spending category in earlier years, while leisure became the most significant category in later years.

In earlier years people used to spend their 35% of weekly income on food in 1968, in the year 2018 only around 15-18% of income was used on food. While households only spent 8-9% of their weekly salary on leiure in 1968, The expenditure surged to around 20-25% in the year 2018.

In contrast, expenses on housing also went up to around 23-24% in 2018, in instance in 1969 only 10% of weekly income was used on housing. families spent more on fuel and power in 1968 compared to 2018, on household goods in both years households spent equally, while people used around 10-15% of salary of personal goods in 1968. The expenditure on transport went upto 13-15% in 2018.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You identify the main shift accurately: food falls from about 35% to roughly 17%, while leisure rises from around 9% to about 22%, and your overview correctly notes that food leads in 1968 whereas leisure leads in 2018. Housing and transport increases are also reported. This gives the response a clear account of the central features. However, some details are incomplete or imprecise: housing is given as 23–24% rather than about 19%, and the claim that personal goods took 10–15% in 1968 is inaccurate (the figure is about 8%). Fuel and power and household goods are mentioned but not quantified, and clothing is omitted. More precise reporting and fuller coverage would strengthen the response.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, an overview, and two detail paragraphs. The contrast between the changing food and leisure shares is easy to follow, and phrases such as “Overall” and “In contrast” help signal relationships. However, the final paragraph combines several categories in a long, loosely connected sentence, making comparisons harder to track. The transition “in instance” is unclear, and the shift from housing to fuel, household goods, personal goods and transport feels list-like rather than grouped by trend. Organise the details into clearer comparisons—for example, categories that rose, those that fell, and those that stayed stable—and use more precise referencing to improve progression.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.5

You use a suitable range of task vocabulary, including “expenditure,” “category,” “surged,” and “weekly income,” and these choices generally communicate the chart’s trends. There is also some variation in how spending is described, rather than relying on one repeated verb. However, several collocations and word choices are awkward: “spent their weekly earning,” “decreased in considerably,” and “used on food” are not natural in this context. “Leiure” is misspelled, and “went upto” is incorrectly written as one word. The phrase “personal goods” is understandable but would be clearer when paired with a precise share. More accurate collocations and careful spelling would make the vocabulary more controlled and flexible.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex structures, including contrast clauses such as “While households only spent…” and “whereas expenditure on housing, transport, leisure increased.” The main comparisons remain understandable, but some grammatical errors recur. For example, “spending on food decreased in considerably” has an unnecessary preposition, and “people used to spend their 35%” has an incorrect possessive construction. The sentence beginning “In contrast, expenses on housing…” runs several ideas together and has faulty punctuation; “in 1969” also conflicts with the chart’s year of 1968. Capitalisation after commas is inconsistent, as in “The expenditure.” Aim for cleaner sentence boundaries and more accurate clause construction while retaining your attempts at complex sentences.

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.