Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-08-17
IELTS Writing Task 1 question
The chart below shows the number of households in the US by their annual income in 2007, 2011 and 2015.
Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.
Student answer (Band 5.5)
The bar graph illustrates the annual income of US households in the year 2007, 2011 and 2015.
Overall, the annual income of household between 50,000-74,999 in the year 2007, 2011 and 2015 has been stable approximately 21 million whereas income between $75,000-$99,999 show minor fluctuations between 14-15 households (millions).
In 2007, the annual income of number of household (million) was 25 which peaked in the year 2011 and a minor decrease in the year 2015 approximately 27 million households.
In 2011, number of households (millions) by annual income between 50,000 to 74,999 did not show major changes when compared to 2007 and 2015. Also, the household of annual income between 25,000-49,999 is mostly 2 millions in 2011 when compared to 2007 with a minor decrease of 1 million in 2015.
In the year 2015, annual income of [redacted phone] or more peaked the highest when compared to 2007 and 2011 of approximately 34 million households.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.5 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.5 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0
The response covers the main features of the chart, but the analysis is often unclear or inaccurate. For example, the statement that the $50,000-$74,999 category was 'stable' at 21 million is not fully supported by the data, and the description of the $100,000+ category is confusingly phrased. The report lacks a clear overview of the most significant trends, such as the overall growth in higher income brackets. Several figures are mentioned without clear context, making it difficult for the reader to follow the comparison between years. To improve, ensure that data points are accurately transcribed and that the relationship between categories and years is explicitly stated.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5
The response is organized into paragraphs, but the progression of ideas is disjointed. While some cohesive devices are used, such as 'Overall' and 'In 2007', the transitions between sentences are often mechanical or confusing. For instance, the jump between discussing the $50,000-$74,999 group and the $25,000-$49,999 group lacks a logical flow. Additionally, referencing is sometimes unclear, particularly when referring back to specific years or income brackets. The paragraphing is present, but the internal structure of the paragraphs does not always support a logical development of the information provided.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.5
The vocabulary is somewhat limited and repetitive. Phrases like 'number of household' and 'annual income' are used frequently without variation. There are also issues with word choice and collocation, such as 'peaked the highest' (which is redundant) and 'mostly 2 millions' (which is imprecise and unnatural). The range of vocabulary is sufficient to convey basic information, but it lacks the precision and flexibility required for higher bands. To improve, focus on using a wider variety of reporting verbs and nouns to describe trends, such as 'fluctuated,' 'remained constant,' or 'experienced a significant increase.'
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5
The response contains a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, but there are frequent grammatical errors that occasionally impede clarity. Examples include 'income of household between 50,000-74,999... has been stable' (missing articles and pluralization) and 'the household of annual income between 25,000-49,999 is mostly 2 millions' (incorrect subject-verb agreement and phrasing). Punctuation is generally functional, but the misuse of prepositions and articles is persistent throughout the text. While the meaning is usually discernible, the high frequency of minor errors prevents the writing from reaching a higher band.
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.