Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-06
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 pie charts illustrates the proportions of British students able to speak languages other than English, in 2000 and 2010.
Overall, the percentage of students who could not speak another language increased in 2010. Also, fewer students spoke Spanish, while the figure for another language and two another languages increased.
In 2000, the largest group of students who was not to speak no-other language with the percentage of 30%. Spanish was the most popular additional language with 20%, while the French language and another language contained almost same percentage around 15%. The proportions of German accounted lowest in the figure with two-other language.
In contrast, in 2010 the percentage of students who do not speak no-other language rise up to 35%. In comparison, Spanish declined significantly from 20% to 10%, while French also fell from 15% to 10%. The figure of German remained same in both years and another language increased 5% from 15% to 20%. Lastly, the two another language accounted rise five percent from 15% to 20%.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 6.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 6.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0
The response addresses all parts of the task by reporting the main features and making comparisons between 2000 and 2010. An overview is present, noting the general trends such as the increase in students with no other language and shifts in specific languages. However, some areas are under-developed or contain inaccuracies in data reporting. For instance, the student states that the figure for German remained the same in both years, whereas the chart shows German at 10% in 2000 and 10% in 2010 (which is correct), but misses deeper synthesis. Furthermore, the description of categories like 'two another language' reflects some confusion in fully explaining the data clearly and accurately. To reach a higher band, the response needs to present a more precise selection of data without minor reporting errors and provide a fully developed overview.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0
The response demonstrates a coherent overall arrangement with a clear attempt at paragraphing, separating the introduction, overview, and body paragraphs for each year. Information and ideas are generally organized logically, starting with general trends before moving into specific details. However, cohesion is at times mechanical and referencing is occasionally unclear, such as the awkward transition phrases and repetitive sentence openings. Cohesive devices are used, but sometimes inaccurately or unnaturally, as seen in phrases like 'In comparison, Spanish declined...' and 'Lastly, the two another language accounted rise five percent'. Paragraphing is used sufficiently, but internal flow within paragraphs could be smoother and more logically connected to achieve a higher standard of progression.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.0
The vocabulary used is adequate for the task, allowing the student to communicate basic trends and proportions. There are attempts to use less common vocabulary and reporting verbs, such as 'significant', 'declined', and 'proportions'. However, there are noticeable word-choice errors, unnatural collocations, and word-form issues throughout the text, such as 'two another language', 'accounted lowest', and 'accounted rise five percent'. Additionally, the student repeatedly misinterprets and awkwardly phrases the 'No other language' category as 'no-other language' or 'speak no-other language'. These lexical inaccuracies and limitations restrict the response, preventing it from demonstrating the precision and flexibility required for a higher band.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0
The writing exhibits a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, attempting structures like comparative clauses and introductory prepositional phrases. However, there are frequent grammatical errors in structures, articles, and prepositions. Examples include 'The pie charts illustrates' (subject-verb agreement), 'who was not to speak no-other language' (faulty relative clause and verb form), and 'do not speak no-other language rise up' (tense and clause structure confusion). While these errors do not completely impede communication, they occur regularly enough to disrupt the fluency of the text. To improve, the student needs to exercise better control over basic grammatical agreements, verb forms, and the accurate construction of complex sentences.
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.