Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · 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 5.5)

The graph below shows proportion of british students at one university able to speak different languages in addition to english, in 2000 and in 2010.

Overall, Most british students are capable of speaking other languages, from french to spanish to german to other langauges. comprising in total from 70% in 2000, to 65% in 2010. While the remaining cannot speak any other language, ranging from 30% in 2000 to 35%in 2010.

First, British students are noticeably capable of speaking one and even two more other langauges, with the data showing growth in number of students able to speak one more language from 15% in year 2000, to 20% in 2010. This is has also applicable on students speaking two other languages, increasing from 10% in 2000 to 15% in 2010.

Next, students are also able to speak other european languages such as french, german and spanish. Each of these languages has evolved in its own way within this decade, while german is growing from 10% on 2000 to 15% in 2010, french and spanish have been shrinking to 10% each in 2010 from their respective 15% and 20% in 2000.

To round it all up, british students in this university indicate a diversity in spoken langauges and have seen generally improvements in this aspect, for the span of these 10 years.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5

The response successfully addresses the main features of the two charts, covering the overall proportions of students who can speak other languages as well as the breakdown by specific languages and number of languages spoken. Key data points from 2000 and 2010 are correctly identified and compared, such as the increase in students speaking two languages and the changes in French, German, and Spanish speakers. However, there are some minor inaccuracies in summarising the exact figures (for example, the text states total non-speakers went from 30% to 35%, whereas the chart details vary slightly depending on how the categories are grouped). The overview provided in the second and final paragraphs captures the general trends reasonably well. To reach a higher band, the student should ensure tighter precision when extracting data from multiple charts.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5

The response is organised into logical paragraphs, starting with an introduction and overview, moving into specific categories, and concluding with a summary. Cohesive devices are used to signal transitions between paragraphs, such as 'Overall', 'First', 'Next', and 'To round it all up'. However, some of these transitional markers are somewhat conversational or mechanical for an Academic Task 1 response. Referencing and pronoun use are generally clear, though paragraphing is slightly fragmented, resulting in an overly brief structure. Progression is maintained throughout, but the logical flow between sentences could be smoothed with more sophisticated cohesive links rather than relying heavily on chronological list markers.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

The vocabulary used is adequate for the task, with domain-specific terms such as 'proportions', 'university', 'languages', and 'diversity'. The student attempts some less common vocabulary and lexical phrases like 'comprising in total', 'evolved in its own way', and 'shrinking'. However, there are notable word choice and spelling inaccuracies, such as lowercase letters for proper nouns ('british', 'english', 'french', 'german', 'spanish') and awkward phrasing like 'growing from 10% on 2000' instead of 'in 2000'. These errors do not impede communication, but they restrict the lexical score to a solid Band 6.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

The student demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, incorporating relative clauses and participial phrases such as 'students who were able to speak' (implied) and 'increasing from 10% in 2000 to 15% in 2010'. There are several grammatical errors and punctuation lapses, including awkward verb tenses and connectors like 'This is has also applicable on' instead of 'This is also applicable to', and minor run-on structures. Despite these errors, meaning is generally clear and communication is not impeded. The range of structures is sufficient to fulfill the requirements, but greater control over prepositions and verb phrases is needed for a higher score.

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.