Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-08-03
IELTS Writing Task 1 question
The charts below show the proportions of British students at one university in England who were able to speak other languages in addition to English, in 2000 and 2010
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
Student answer (Band 5.0)
The pie charts illustrate the percentages of British learners at particular university in Britain who were able to speak other languages in addition to English in the year 2000 and 2010.
Overall, students who cannot speak other language accounted for the highest proportion in both years, while students who can speak German language only made up the smallest share. Spanish and French speaking students were stood at high proportion in first year it decline and shared similar share in next year.
Students who cannot speak other language accounted for 30% of the total proportion in 2000 and it increased by 5% in the next decade and recorded the highest proportion, which was 35% in 2010. Similarly, learners who can speak two other language stood at 10% in the year 2000, which increased by 5% and accounted for 15% in the year 2010.
The proportion of Spanish and French speakers were 20% and 15% in 2000, where both made up similar share 10%, respectively. The students who can speak another language constituted for 10% in 2000 and it increased by 5%, which stood at 15% in the year 2010. learners who can speak German language only constituted for 10% in 2000, which remain stable in the year 2010.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0
The response provides a clear overview and identifies the main trends, such as the increase in students who cannot speak other languages. However, the reporting of data is inconsistent and contains inaccuracies. For example, you state that Spanish and French speakers 'made up similar share 10%' in 2000, but the chart indicates 20% and 15% respectively. Additionally, some descriptions are confusing, such as the claim that French and Spanish speakers 'declined and shared similar share in next year'. While the main features are selected, the lack of precision in data reporting and the contradictory statements regarding the figures prevent a higher score.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5
The essay is organized into logical paragraphs, with an introduction, an overview, and body paragraphs. There is a clear progression of ideas. However, the use of cohesive devices is sometimes mechanical or repetitive, such as the frequent use of 'accounted for' and 'stood at'. Referencing is occasionally unclear, particularly in the second paragraph where the flow of information regarding the language groups becomes difficult to follow. While the structure is generally sound, the transitions between sentences could be more sophisticated to improve the overall flow.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The vocabulary is adequate for the task but lacks variety and precision. You rely on a limited set of phrases like 'accounted for', 'made up', and 'constituted for' (which is grammatically incorrect). There are also some awkward collocations, such as 'particular university in Britain' (missing an article) and 'German language only'. To reach a higher band, you should aim to use a wider range of synonyms for describing trends, such as 'remained constant', 'fluctuated', or 'experienced a marginal increase', and ensure that word choices are more natural and contextually appropriate.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0
The response contains a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, but there are frequent grammatical errors that occasionally impede clarity. Common issues include missing articles ('at particular university'), incorrect verb forms ('were stood at'), and subject-verb agreement errors ('it decline'). Additionally, there are punctuation and phrasing issues, such as 'constituted for', which is not standard usage. While the meaning is generally understandable, the frequency of these errors suggests a lack of control over more complex structures, limiting the score to the 5.5–6.0 range.
Browse more IELTS Writing model answers or get your own writing scored by the same AI examiner.