Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-16

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 pie charts illustrate the percentage of students from British at one college in England who were capable to speak more than language to english in both years 2000 and 2010.

Overall, students who dont speak any other languages than english accounted for the largest propotion in both years while undergraduates were speak other language had fewer share.

To begin with, In 2000, British students were doesn't speak any language than english recorded the largest proportion at 30%, followed by undergraduates were speak spanish language stood at 20%. students were speak frensh and another language made up 15%. German speakers and individuals were speak two other languages share alike at 10%.

In 2010, students were can't speak any other language experienced a slight increase at 35%.speakers another language rose to 20% ,foolowed by students were speak two other languages at 15%, spanish ,frensh and german speakers had the same proportion at 10 % each.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

You identify the main overall pattern: the “No Other Language” group was the largest in both years, and you report several relevant figures accurately, including 30% rising to 35%, Spanish falling from 20% to 10%, and “Another language” increasing to 20%. However, the response only partly develops the comparison. The overview’s claim that students who spoke another language “had fewer share” is unclear and does not capture the notable shifts across categories. Some details are also inaccurate: French was 15% in 2000, not grouped at 15% with “another language” as written, and the 2010 figures for French, Spanish and German were each 10%. Make the overview more precise and compare the main increases and decreases explicitly.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, an overview, and separate paragraphs for 2000 and 2010. This gives the reader a generally coherent route through the information, and phrases such as “To begin with” and “In 2010” help signal the shift between years. However, the progression within sentences is sometimes difficult to follow because several categories and figures are crowded together, particularly in the 2000 paragraph. The overview also does not clearly prepare the reader for the detailed comparisons. Use clearer sentence boundaries and group related categories—for example, the categories that rose, fell or stayed unchanged. More precise linking and reference would make the organisation less mechanical and the comparisons easier to track.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some task-relevant vocabulary, including “percentage,” “proportion,” “largest,” “increase,” and “rose,” which helps communicate the chart’s main features. However, the range is limited and several word choices or collocations are inaccurate, sometimes making the meaning unclear. Examples include “students from British,” “capable to speak,” “had fewer share,” and “share alike.” Spelling errors such as “propotion,” “frensh,” and “foolowed” also reduce accuracy. Aim for consistent, natural chart language: describe students as “British students,” say they “could speak” a language, and use “accounted for” or “represented” when reporting proportions. Check spelling and avoid repeating “students were speak” throughout.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

The response attempts both simple statements and longer comparisons, and the year-by-year structure gives you opportunities to use varied sentence forms. However, many sentences contain errors in verb forms and sentence construction, which can make the information difficult to interpret. For example, “students were doesn't speak” and “undergraduates were speak” use incorrect verb patterns; “students were can't speak” also combines incompatible forms. There are problems with articles, capitalization and punctuation, including the run-on transition “35%.speakers.” Build accurate basic clauses first, such as “The proportion of students who spoke no other language was 30%.” Then add comparisons with controlled structures such as “while” or “whereas,” checking subject–verb agreement and sentence boundaries.

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.