Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-08

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 at

one university in England who could speak other languages in additon

to English in two years in 2000 and 2010.

Overall, the students who were not able to speak another language shared the highest contribution in both years. On the other hand, the students who could speak two other languages and German only, shared the lowest percentage in 2000. While, in 2010, the stuents who could speak Spanish, French and German only occupied the lowest proportion but their proportion was same.

Firslty, the students were not able to speak another language accounted for the largest share in 2000 and 2010. The proportion was 30% and 35% respectively. Following it, the people who chould speak French only and another language contributed for the same proportion and this was 15%. In contrast, in 2010, the students who could speak two other languages occupied a proportion of 15%.

Secondly, in 2000, the students who were able to speak German only and two other languages showed the same but lowest proportion and it was only 10%. In 2010, the students who could speak Spanish, French and German only occupied the same but lowest proportion of only 10 %.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify the main overall pattern: students speaking no other language formed the largest group in both years, rising from 30% to 35%, and you report several smaller categories accurately. However, the account is only partly complete. The overview says the lowest groups in 2010 included Spanish, French and German, but it does not clearly highlight the notable fall in Spanish from 20% to 10% or the rise in “another language” from 15% to 20%. Some comparisons are also unclear: “Following it” does not specify which year’s figures are being compared, and the 2010 figure for two other languages is given without a corresponding comparison. Select the key increases and decreases and report them explicitly to make the summary more fully informative.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, an overview and two detail paragraphs. The use of “Overall,” “Firstly,” “Secondly” and “In contrast” helps signal the stages of the report, and the information is generally understandable. However, the progression is somewhat mechanical, and the two detail paragraphs do not establish a clear comparison between the years. For example, “Following it” has an unclear reference, while “In contrast, in 2010” shifts to a new year without explaining the relationship to the preceding figures. The overview also repeats information later rather than guiding the reader through the main changes. Grouping the figures by trend—such as categories that rose, fell or stayed constant—would create clearer progression and more precise links.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use enough task-related vocabulary to describe proportions, including “accounted for the largest share,” “lowest proportion” and “occupied a proportion.” This shows an attempt to vary the language rather than relying only on “was.” However, some choices are inaccurate or unnatural for chart reporting. “Highest contribution” suggests a contribution rather than a share, and “contributed for the same proportion” is an awkward collocation. “Shared the highest contribution” is also less precise than saying a category “accounted for the largest proportion.” Spelling errors such as “additon,” “stuents,” “Firslty” and “chould” are noticeable and weaken control. Aim for accurate, natural reporting phrases and proofread spelling; this will make the comparisons clearer without requiring more elaborate vocabulary.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex sentences, including a contrast with “While” and clauses beginning “who could speak.” However, control is inconsistent, and several errors affect sentence accuracy. The opening says “The pie charts illustrates,” where the plural subject requires “illustrate.” The sentence beginning “While, in 2010” is a fragment, and “the students … shared the lowest percentage” has an unclear construction. In “the same but lowest proportion and it was only 10%,” the comparison needs clearer punctuation and sentence structure. There are also inconsistent forms such as “students … was” in the overview. Use complete sentences, check subject–verb agreement, and make comparisons with a clear subject and verb. More accurate control of these patterns would improve readability.

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.