Band 4.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 4.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-09-14
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 4.0)
The begin wirh show the proporations of British kids at one univercity in England able to other languge in 2000 and 2010, about all place difference into speech, That is allow to this process. no ther language spoke to 30 percentage. Then French language ratio is 15 and also continue with German only 10 %. That is depand on public and possible to all person, so today fees problem is more then people.
The next one is Spanish is 20% and it is higher level student in study regarding teach. Then another languge use to 15 percentage, some time school time according to class time spend in student. it is good work also, and last one is two other languages is only 10 % and also same in German laanguage.
This chart is watch in only higher level of no other language and it is usefull in future also because that is the language and much type of use full to them
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 4.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 4.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 4.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 4.0 |
| Overall | 4.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 4.0
The response attempts to summarize the provided charts showing the proportions of British students able to speak other languages in 2000 and 2010. However, the attempt is severely limited, highly confused, and largely incoherent regarding the actual data presented in the charts. The student mentions figures such as 'no other language spoke to 30 percentage', 'French language ratio is 15', and 'Spanish is 20%', but the reporting lacks clarity and fails to make meaningful comparisons between the two years. Furthermore, the response digresses into irrelevant commentary about 'fees problem' and 'higher level student in study'. Because the overview of the main features is heavily obscured by unclear language and irrelevant statements, the response fails to fully address the requirements of Task 1, earning a band score of 4.0.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 4.0
The organization of information in this response is extremely weak. The text is divided into three brief paragraphs, but there is no clear logical progression or overall structure guiding the reader through the data. Cohesive devices are either missing, inadequate, or used incorrectly, as seen in transitions like 'The begin wirh' and 'The next one is'. Referencing is frequently unclear, making it difficult to follow which data points or years are being discussed. Paragraphing is attempted, but the internal cohesion of the writing frequently breaks down, resulting in a text that does not flow coherently. This aligns closely with the Band 4 descriptors.
Lexical Resource — Band 4.0
The vocabulary used is extremely basic, repetitive, and plagued by severe spelling and word-choice errors that frequently strain the reader's understanding. Examples of non-standard usage and misspellings include 'wirh' for with, 'proporations', 'univercity', 'languge', 'spoke', 'depand', and 'usefull'. The student attempts to use some topic-related terms like 'percentage' and language names, but the limited range and persistent errors restrict communication significantly. There is no evidence of less common lexical items used with precision or awareness of style, placing this performance at a Band 4 level.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 4.0
The grammatical range is extremely limited, consisting almost entirely of poorly constructed simple sentences that fail to communicate meaning clearly. There is a total lack of control over basic grammatical structures, verb tenses, and sentence boundaries. Numerous major errors occur throughout the text, such as 'The begin wirh show', 'able to other languge', 'That is allow to this process', and 'fees problem is more then people'. Punctuation is also poorly handled, with run-on phrasing and fragmented ideas. Because errors are frequent and constantly distort meaning, the performance reflects the Band 4 descriptor.
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.