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 graph demonstrates the data about the proportion in which families spent their weekly income on different headings in the year 1968 and 2018.

At a first glance, in the year 1968, families spent 35% of the weekly income on food.

Turning into the details, in 1968, the highest expenditure was on food which was 35% of their income while the lowest were in fuel and power which was a little above 5%. Exactly 10% of their income contributed on housing and clothing and footware. The family members spent more or less 7% of their weekly income on household goods, personal goods and transport. Families spent approximately 8% of their weekly income on leisure.

In 2018, the highest expense was on Leisure which was almost 23% of their income while the lowest were on fuel and power and personal goods which was below 5%. The families spent approximately between 15% and 20% of their income on food and housing. Exactly 5% was spent on clothing and footware. The proportion of household goods expenses remains the same as the year 1968. The transport expenditure was almost 15% of the families weekly income.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify several key features accurately: food was the largest category in 1968 at 35%, leisure was highest in 2018 at about 22–23%, and household-goods spending stayed at roughly 8%. You also compare the two years across the categories. However, the response lacks a clear overall overview that summarises the broad shift in spending—for example, the fall in food’s share and the rise in leisure, housing and transport. Some figures are imprecise or misleading: 1968 household goods, personal goods and transport were about 8% each, not 7%, and 2018 food and housing were about 17% and 19%, rather than simply “between 15% and 20%.” A concise overview and more precise comparisons would make the report more complete.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response is arranged in a generally understandable order: it introduces the chart, discusses 1968, and then moves to 2018. This gives the reader a basic progression, and phrases such as “In 2018” make the change of period clear. However, the opening observation about food is repeated in the next paragraph, while the paragraphing does not clearly distinguish an overview from detailed comparisons. Some linking phrases, including “At a first glance” and “Turning into the details,” feel mechanical and do not establish relationships between the figures. Grouping categories by whether their shares rose, fell or remained stable would create a clearer comparison across years and improve the flow.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of task-related vocabulary, including “proportion,” “highest expenditure,” “approximately” and “remains the same,” so the main information is generally clear. There are also attempts to vary wording with “expense” and “expenditure.” However, some choices are unnatural or imprecise for describing a chart: “different headings,” “contributed on housing,” and “the lowest were in fuel and power” do not express the data naturally. “Footware” is misspelled; the chart label is “footwear.” Repeated use of “spent” and “income” also limits variety. More accurate collocations such as “accounted for,” “share of weekly spending,” and “the smallest proportion” would make the description more precise and fluent.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple sentences and some longer structures, and most of the comparisons remain understandable. For example, “The proportion of household goods expenses remains the same as the year 1968” communicates a stable figure, although the tense and construction need refinement. Some errors occur in agreement and sentence structure, as in “the lowest were in fuel and power” and “the lowest were on fuel and power and personal goods”; a category or proportion should be the grammatical subject. The phrase “Exactly 10% of their income contributed on housing and clothing” also has an unclear subject and verb pattern. Use consistent past-tense reporting and check subject–verb agreement and sentence construction to improve accuracy.

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.