Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 4.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-01
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 4.5)
There is the comparison of the student in the form of chart , the comparison was based on the students avilable in the university of london .It was made between the students of 2000 and 2010 at that universty .It make comparison of the students those can speak other langauges then english.
In 2000 their are less numbers those are able to deliver another langauge ,The percentage in 2000 is 15 and 2010 it's 20 .The amount of the students those can stand well in German is same in the both years ,There percentage is 10 in the both 2000 and 2010 . The students those can speak Spanish are more in 2000 with the percentage of 20 then the student in 2010 with the percentage of 10 . well in case of French ,There are high amount of students in 2000 then in 2010 .Also for others , In case of two language speaker there is a bit high numbers of studenst in 2010 then 2000 with the comparison of 15 and 10.Mainly about those who can not speak any langauge,There is a high amount of students in 2010 then in 2000
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 4.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 4.5 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 4.5 |
| Overall | 4.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0
The response addresses the task only partially, presenting some information from the charts regarding British students' language abilities in 2000 and 2010. However, the selection of data is incomplete and lacks a clear overview. While the student attempts to make some comparisons, such as noting that 'Spanish are more in 2000' and mentioning the percentages for 'No Other Language', the presentation is fragmented and lacks detailed reporting of the main features. Some figures are partially reported, but key trends are missed or obscured by vague language and under-developed ideas, such as 'Also for others'. To improve, the writer needs to provide a clear overview outlining the overall trends and ensure all significant data points and comparisons are fully articulated.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.5
The response shows some organization, but there is no clear overall progression or logical structure. The text is divided into two short paragraphs, but ideas within them jump randomly between categories without a coherent sequence. Cohesive devices are used very minimally and sometimes inaccurately, such as 'well in case of French' and 'Mainly about those who can not speak any langauge'. Referencing and logical transitions between sentences are frequently faulty, making the flow disjointed. To achieve a higher band, the writer must structure the response logically with a clear introduction, body paragraphs grouped by logical themes or trends, and appropriate cohesive devices to guide the reader smoothly through the comparisons.
Lexical Resource: Band 4.5
The vocabulary used is limited and barely adequate for the task. The writer relies heavily on basic and repetitive terms, such as 'students', 'chart', 'languages', and 'percentage'. There are noticeable lexical errors and awkward word choices throughout the text, including 'avilable', 'universty', 'deliver another langauge', 'stand well in German', and 'high amount of students'. Additionally, spelling errors like 'langauges', 'studenst', and 'langauge' occur. These errors sometimes cause difficulty for the reader. To improve, the writer should build a wider range of functional vocabulary for describing data, such as proportions, percentages, and trends, while paying closer attention to spelling and standard collocations.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5
The response demonstrates a very limited range of grammatical structures, relying almost entirely on simple sentences that are frequently faulty. There are persistent, frequent errors in basic grammar, punctuation, and sentence construction. Examples include subject-verb agreement issues like 'there are less numbers those are able', incorrect article usage, missing prepositions, and run-on phrasing such as 'The amount of the students those can stand well in German is same in the both years ,There percentage is 10'. Punctuation is also poorly handled with stray commas and missing full stops. To reach a higher band, the writer must practice forming accurate complex sentences, improve control over verb tenses and agreement, and eliminate frequent basic structural errors.
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.