Band 7.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 7.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-14

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 7.0)

The pie charts illustrates the proportion of scholars in an England based university who were able to converse in different languages in addition to English for a time period of 10 years from 2000 till 2010.

Overall, the English speaking students had the highest proportion in the entire timeframe while the Spanish and French speakers experienced a declined over the period. Whereas, the scholars with the fluency in one or two other languages other than English experienced a jump.

In 2000, students who were fluent in English had the highest proportion with 30%, followed by Spanish speakers at 20% and French speakers at 15%. Furthermore, students with fluency in German stood at 10%, while the remaining students who spoke either one or two languages other than English were at 10% and 15% respectively.

As for 2010, the English speakers kept their dominance and were increased from 30% to 35%, while the Spanish and French speakers both dropped to 10%. In contrast, the students who were able to speak one or multiple other languages apart from English saw an increase to 15% and 20% respectively. Whereas, the German speakers kept a constant 10% proportion throughout the time period.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.5

You select the main comparisons accurately: the no-other-language group is largest in both years and rises from 30% to 35%, Spanish and French decline, and German remains at 10%. The overview also captures the increase among students speaking other languages, and the body supports it with relevant figures. This gives a clear, well-supported account of the charts. One imprecision is describing the largest group as “English speaking students”; the chart means students who spoke no language other than English, not that English was their only or primary language in a broader sense. Also, the overview’s “one or two other languages” is not fully clear because the chart distinguishes “another language” from “two other languages.” More exact category labels would make an already strong summary more precise.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The response is organised effectively into an introduction, an overview, and separate paragraphs for 2000 and 2010. The progression is easy to follow, and comparisons such as “In contrast” help signal changes between the years. The figures are grouped sensibly rather than listed without structure. However, some linking is slightly mechanical or awkward: “Whereas” begins a sentence fragment after the overview, and it is used again at the end of the final paragraph without a complete contrasting clause. The repeated “while” and “whereas” constructions also make some relationships less smooth. Connect the contrasting points within complete sentences and vary the transitions to make cohesion more flexible and unobtrusive.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.5

You use a reasonable range of vocabulary for describing proportions and change, including “highest proportion,” “dropped,” “increased,” “constant,” and “experienced a jump.” These choices make the main trends clear, and the language is generally understandable. Some less suitable or imprecise expressions limit the precision of the report: “scholars” is not the natural term for university students, “English speaking students” mislabels the no-other-language category, and “kept their dominance” is an awkward collocation. “Fluency” and “fluent” also imply a level of proficiency that the chart does not measure. Prefer neutral chart language such as “students who spoke no other language” and “the proportion rose,” using category labels consistently.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You attempt a mix of simple and complex sentences, including comparisons with “while” and “whereas,” and most of the information remains clear. However, some grammatical errors recur. The opening has subject–verb disagreement in “The pie charts illustrates,” and “experienced a declined” uses an incorrect article and verb form. In “the English speakers kept their dominance and were increased,” the passive construction is not appropriate for the intended meaning; use “their proportion increased.” The sentence beginning “Whereas” at the end is also incomplete, as it lacks a main clause. Review agreement, verb forms, and sentence boundaries, then check each complex sentence to ensure its clauses are complete and correctly connected.

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.