Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 21 · 2026-10-22

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 6.0)

The pie chart and table compare the percentage breakdown of the types of users at university library and their satisfaction level about the library.

Overall, it is clear that full-time undergraduate and post-graduate accounted for the largest users at library while academic staff and distant learning remained the lowest users of library. Also a higher percentage about opening hours and the assistance of staff at library, whereas, a lower percentage about the availability of journals and the reliability of wi-fi was found.

Full-time undergraduate users and full-time postgraduate users made up the largest share of 44% and 25% respectively which was more than twice the percentage of part-time postgraduate. User satisfaction about the assistance of staff at library was twice as high as the the availability of journals in library at 95%. However, 19% of users were not happy about the reliability of wi-fi.

Distant learners and academic staff made up the smallest share of the users at library at an average of 7.5%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You identify the main user groups and give a broad overview of satisfaction, including the high ratings for staff and opening hours and lower results for journals and wi-fi. The figures for undergraduates (44%), full-time postgraduates (25%), and dissatisfied wi-fi users (19%) are accurate. However, some key comparisons are incomplete or unclear: the statement that staff satisfaction was “twice as high” as journal availability does not specify which satisfaction measure is being compared, and the table’s 95% very-satisfied rating for staff is not directly compared with the 45% very-satisfied rating for journals. The overview also groups opening hours and staff assistance together without reporting their distinct results. Develop the table summary with clearer, like-for-like comparisons and include the 0% dissatisfaction for both of these categories.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, an overview, and two paragraphs of supporting details. This gives the reader a clear general route through the information, and words such as “Overall,” “However,” and “respectively” help connect points. However, the final paragraph introduces the smallest user groups after the satisfaction details, so the organisation does not consistently group related information. Some links are also unclear: “twice as high” leaves the comparison uncertain, and “whereas” in the overview joins ideas without making the contrast precise. A more deliberate sequence—first user categories, then satisfaction results—would improve progression. Use references such as “this figure” only when the comparison is unmistakable, and make each paragraph focus on one chart or set of related features.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of task-related vocabulary, including “percentage breakdown,” “accounted for,” “largest share,” and “reliability.” These choices help communicate the main categories and comparisons. Some wording is imprecise or repetitive, however: “users at library” and “satisfaction about the library” are not natural collocations, while “distant learning” is less accurate than the chart’s “distance learning.” “Assistance of staff” is understandable but less idiomatic than “helpfulness of staff,” and “not happy” is informal for a report. The phrase “at an average of 7.5%” also obscures that the two groups have separate values. Aim for precise chart terminology and formal, natural collocations so that comparisons are easier to interpret.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and more complex forms, including a relative clause in “which was more than twice the percentage” and contrastive linking with “while” and “whereas.” Most sentences remain understandable, but some grammatical errors and awkward constructions reduce accuracy. For example, “at university library” needs an article, and “full-time undergraduate and post-graduate accounted” has a number-agreement problem because the subject refers to two groups. The phrase “twice as high as the the availability” contains a repeated article and an unclear comparison structure. There is also inconsistent article use in “at library.” Review articles, subject–verb agreement, and sentence construction, and check punctuation around linking words. More consistently accurate complex sentences would strengthen the report.

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.