Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 21 · 2026-11-10

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The chart and table below show the results of a survey of library users at a university.

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

Categories of library users

Student answer (Band 5.5)

The pie chart and table chart illustrates the result of a survey of library users at a univeristry. Overall, it is evident that categories of library users full time undergraduate was higher also other category academic staff stood at lower stage. whereas library user satisfication percentage helpfulness of staff was very satisfied. in addition availability of journals stood at lowest.

To begin, category of library users highest was full time undergraduate was 44%. after that second highest value was 25%. in addition part time postgraduate stood at 16%. and distance learning (all courses) approximately 8% and academic staff around 7%.

In contrast, library users satisfication. library opening hours very satisfied 65% fairly satisfied 35 not satisfied 0% after that highest one helpfulness of staff very satisfied 95% fairly satisfied 5% not satisfied 0%. then availability of books very satisfied 50% fairly satisfied 40% not satisfied 10%. whereas lowest availability of journals very satisfied 45% fairly satisfied 35% not satisfied 20% in addition reliability of wifi very satisfied 48% fairly satisfied 33% not satisfied 19%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

The response covers both visuals and identifies several key figures accurately: full-time undergraduates are the largest user group at 44%, academic staff the smallest at 7%, and staff helpfulness receives the highest very-satisfied rating at 95%. It also reports the satisfaction figures for all five services. The overview, however, is not fully clear: saying that journals “stood at lowest” does not specify that this refers to the very-satisfied share, and the opening-hours result is also notably positive, with 65% very satisfied and none dissatisfied. Some comparisons are listed rather than interpreted, and the second-highest user group is given as 25% without naming it. A clearer overview distinguishing the user profile from satisfaction patterns would make the main features more complete and precise.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable overall structure: an introduction and overview are followed by one paragraph on user categories and another on satisfaction. This makes the two visuals easy to locate, and sequencing the user groups from largest to smallest is helpful. However, progression within sentences is often mechanical, with repeated “after that,” “in addition,” and “whereas.” Several fragments and abrupt transitions, such as “In contrast, library users satisfication,” interrupt the flow. The overview also combines several points without clearly separating the two main comparisons. Use complete sentences, group related figures more deliberately, and rely on clear reference and contrast rather than repeated linking phrases to make the organisation smoother.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

The response uses relevant task vocabulary, including “full-time undergraduate,” “part-time postgraduate,” “very satisfied,” and “reliability of wi-fi,” so the reader can identify the categories and ratings. However, the range is limited and some wording is imprecise or repetitive. “Table chart” is not a natural description, while “stood at lowest” does not clearly explain what was lowest. The spelling errors in “univeristry” and “satisfication,” along with inconsistent forms such as “full time,” reduce accuracy. Try using precise reporting language such as “accounted for,” “recorded,” and “the lowest proportion of very satisfied users,” and check spelling and standard hyphenation. These changes would make the comparisons clearer and more natural.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

There are attempts to use both simple statements and more developed comparisons, and the figures are generally understandable. However, sentence control is uneven. The opening sentence, “The pie chart and table chart illustrates,” has a subject–verb agreement error, and “categories of library users full time undergraduate was higher” is an incomplete and awkwardly structured comparison. Several later points are also run together without full sentence boundaries, for example the sequence beginning “library opening hours very satisfied 65%.” Articles and sentence patterns are often omitted, and punctuation does not consistently separate clauses. Build each comparison around a clear subject and verb—for example, “Full-time undergraduates made up the largest group”—and use a mix of accurate simple and 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.