Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-15

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 5.0)

The chart describe the proportion student at one university in England, student speak other languages inaddtion to biritsh in 2000 and 2010. Gernely, student spoken other languages in ten years. The student speak other languages such as Spanish, French, German, another language, two other languages and no other language.

The 30% no other languages speak languages other than Biritsh in 2000 and after ten year later speak 35%. 20% Spanish language speak in 2000 and after this languages is reduce to 10% in 2010. The student spoken the French languages is 15% this language is low 5% in 2010.

The student speak the two other language is 10% in 2000 and after that this language is increases in 5% in 2010. Another languages asked is 15% and he reached 20% in 2010. The 10% of these languages which England university student speak only Greman language is same in ten years 2000 to 2010.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You report several key figures accurately: no other language rises from 30% to 35%, Spanish falls from 20% to 10%, and German remains at 10%. You also include the changes for French, another language, and two other languages, so the response is relevant and covers most categories. However, there is no clear overview identifying the main pattern: the share speaking no other language is the largest in both years, while the proportions speaking Spanish and French decline. The opening instead lists the categories, and the statement that students generally spoke other languages is vague and does not summarise the overall comparison. A concise overview of the dominant and changing categories would make the main features clearer and better developed.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0

The response has a basic paragraph structure: it introduces the charts, then reports several figures across two body paragraphs. This gives the reader some organisation, and comparisons between 2000 and 2010 are generally easy to identify. However, there is no distinct overview, so the progression from introduction to detailed figures is incomplete. Connections are often repetitive or mechanical, particularly the repeated use of “and after” and “in 2010.” Some references are also unclear, as in “this language is low 5%,” where the reader must infer that French fell by five percentage points. Grouping the increases, decreases, and unchanged figure more deliberately, with clearer linking and reference, would improve the flow.

Lexical Resource: Band 4.5

You use relevant chart vocabulary, including “proportion,” “reduce,” “increases,” and “same,” and you attempt to describe changes rather than merely list figures. However, the range is limited and several word choices or forms make the meaning difficult to follow. Examples include “student spoken,” “this language is low 5%,” and “Another languages asked,” which are not natural ways to describe chart data. There are also spelling errors such as “inaddtion,” “biritsh,” “Gernely,” and “Greman.” Use precise reporting phrases consistently, such as “the proportion speaking French fell” or “the figure for another language rose,” and check spelling of language names.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

Most sentences use simple structures, and you attempt some comparisons between the two years. However, grammatical errors are frequent and sometimes make relationships between figures unclear. For example, “The chart describe the proportion student” has subject–verb agreement and article problems, while “The student speak the two other language is 10%” has an incomplete sentence structure and incorrect agreement. Tense and verb forms are also inconsistent in phrases such as “is reduce” and “is increases.” Articles, plurals, and sentence boundaries need more reliable control. Practise a clear pattern such as “The proportion of students speaking Spanish fell from 20% in 2000 to 10% in 2010,” then vary this structure for other categories.

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.