Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 13 · 2026-08-17

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The bar chart below shows the top ten countries for the production and consumption of electricity in 2014.

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

Student answer (Band 6.0)

The rendered bar chart illustrates the information about the creation and utilization of electricity in top ten countries in the year 2014. The data is calibrated into billion kWh.

Looking from an overall prespective, it can be clearly seen that the china produced and consumed the highest amount of electricity however, Korea remained lowest at both creation and utilisation in the given year.

After taking the statistical data into account, it may be infered that in 2014 China produced and consumed the highest proportion of electricity which was noticed as 5,398 billion kWh and 5,398 kWh however, the Korea generated and consumed the least proportion of electricity which was recorded as 485.1 billion kWh and 449.5 billion kWh. Moreover, united States remained at second with the proportion of electricity production and consumption which was observed as 4,099 billion kWh and 3,866 billion kWh.

Turning towards the rest of the details, it can be clearly seen that the ratio of electricity generated and consumed in Russia and Japan was observed as 1,057 billion kWh, 1,038 billion kWh and 936.2 billion kWh and 856.7 billion kWh. Interestingly, the proportion of electricity produced and used in the France, Brazil, Germany was close to similar which was recorded as 561.2 billion kWh, 462.9 billion kWh, 530.7 billion kWh, 455.88 billion kWh, 526.6 billion kWh and 582.5 billion kWh respectively.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.0

The response covers all parts of the task by identifying the top ten countries and comparing production and consumption. The main features are highlighted, such as China's leading position and Korea's lowest. However, the report is somewhat mechanical, relying heavily on listing data points rather than synthesizing the information. The comparison of the final group (France, Brazil, Germany) is confusingly presented, as the data points are listed without clear mapping to the specific countries, making it difficult for the reader to follow the comparison. To reach a higher band, focus on grouping data more effectively and providing a more analytical summary of the trends rather than just transcribing figures.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.0

The response is organized into clear paragraphs, and there is a logical progression from an overview to specific details. Cohesive devices such as 'Looking from an overall perspective', 'After taking the statistical data into account', and 'Turning towards the rest of the details' are used to structure the report. However, the referencing within the final paragraph is problematic; the list of figures is not clearly linked to the specific countries mentioned, which disrupts the flow and clarity of the information. Improving the precision of referencing would significantly enhance the coherence of the report.

Lexical Resource — Band 6.0

The vocabulary is generally adequate for the task, using terms like 'calibrated', 'utilization', and 'proportion'. However, there are several instances of awkward word choice and minor errors, such as 'creation' instead of 'generation', and the repetitive use of 'proportion of electricity' which is not always the most precise term for these figures. Additionally, there are minor errors in article usage, such as 'the China' and 'the Korea', which are grammatically incorrect. While the range is sufficient to convey the main points, it lacks the flexibility and precision required for a higher band.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 6.0

The response uses a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. There are several grammatical errors, including incorrect article usage ('the China', 'the France'), subject-verb agreement issues, and awkward phrasing like 'was noticed as' and 'was close to similar'. Punctuation is generally functional, but the final sentence is cluttered and difficult to parse due to the long list of numbers without clear grammatical separation. While the meaning is generally clear, the frequency of these errors prevents the response from reaching a higher band. Focusing on proofreading for articles and sentence structure would be beneficial.

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.