Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-11-02

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 provides information on expenditure of families living in a country with weekly earning in 1968 and 2018.

Overall, the large proportion of earnings was used on food in 1968, while leisure being most important factor for the families in 2018. Moreover, the weekly income on personal goods were minimal for the families in both given dates.

Firstly, the food had occupied the highest portion of income with fuel and power being lowest in 1968 but in 2018 the earnings used for food was heavily reduced to around 25%. Transports expense of the families has increased arounf 7% from 1968 to 2008. There have not been any significant changes in household goods expenses in the given dates.

Secondly, in 1968 the families using clothing and footware required more portion of income than in 2018. They used to spend less money on leisure compared to 2018 families. Fuel and power was used less by 2018 families which is around 7% of the weekly income and 10 % was used by families from 1968 from the earnings.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You identify the main contrast: food takes the largest share in 1968, while leisure is highest in 2018, and you note that household-goods spending is unchanged. These are relevant overview points. However, several figures and comparisons are inaccurate: food falls to about 17%, not 25%; transport rises by about 6 percentage points, not 7, and the comparison says 2008 rather than 2018. You also describe personal goods as minimal in both years, although it is not among the lowest categories in 1968. The account of fuel and power reverses the figures: it falls from about 6% to 4%, rather than from 10% to 7%. More accurate reporting and fuller coverage of the largest changes would make the response more complete.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a clear overall shape, with an introduction, an overview and two detail paragraphs. The sequence from the general trends to category comparisons is understandable, and signposts such as “Overall,” “Firstly” and “Secondly” help the reader follow the account. However, the detail paragraphs do not consistently group or compare the data in a clear way, and some links are awkward: the sentence beginning “Firstly” moves from food to fuel and then to 2018 food spending without a smooth comparison. “Moreover” introduces a point that is not well supported by the chart. Organise the details around the biggest increases and decreases, and use more precise referencing so each comparison clearly identifies both years.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant chart vocabulary, including “proportion,” “expenditure,” “increased” and “reduced,” and the reader can generally understand the categories being discussed. There is some variety in how you describe spending. However, several word choices and collocations are unnatural or imprecise, such as “weekly earning,” “the food had occupied,” and “most important factor” for a spending category. Spelling errors in “arounf” and “footware,” along with the inconsistent form “Transports expense,” also reduce accuracy. Aim for standard report language such as “share of weekly income,” “accounted for” and “spending on transport.” Check category names and spelling carefully, and avoid describing expenditure as a factor or something that “occupies” income.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and more complex sentences, including a contrast with “while” and a clause beginning “which is around 7%.” Most of the intended meaning remains understandable. Some grammatical errors nevertheless recur. For example, “the large proportion of earnings was used” has an awkward singular construction, while “personal goods were minimal” does not correctly express that spending was low. In “There have not been any significant changes,” the present perfect is not appropriate for comparing two completed years. Articles and sentence structure also need attention in phrases such as “the food had occupied the highest portion.” Use past simple consistently for the chart years, and check subject–verb agreement and clause construction when combining comparisons.

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.