Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-20

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 chart illustartes the precentages of British students at one particular university in England that who can speak english as well as forgien languages in 2000 and 2010.

Overall, student who speak no other language was the most significant proportion by far in both the years. Similar patterns can be observed for german, french and two other languages. However, percentage of student who speak spanish decreased over the peroid of time.

In 2000, no other language constituted the largest share, at 30% and this figure sharply rose to 35% in 2010, making up the highest figure in 2000 and 2010. Followed by, spanish ranks second, making up 20% in 2001 and slightly decreased to 10% in 2010. who speak german and two other languages recorded same share, at 10% in 2001. While, two other languages proporton increased by 5% in 2010 and percentage of students who c

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

You identify the main overall feature correctly: students speaking no other language formed the largest group in both years, rising from 30% to 35%, and Spanish declined. However, the report is incomplete and only partially covers the chart. It stops mid-sentence, leaving the French and “another language” figures and trends unreported, and the comparison of German is not fully developed. There are also factual errors: Spanish is given as 20% in 2001 rather than 2000, and German and two other languages are said to have the same share in 2001, although the chart shows 10% for each in 2000. The response is also two words below the required minimum. Include the remaining categories and check years and figures carefully.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, an overview and a paragraph of figures, so the reader can identify the intended organisation. However, progression is limited because the final paragraph ends abruptly at “percentage of students who c”, leaving an unfinished comparison and making the report feel incomplete. Some linking is also awkward or inaccurate: “Followed by” is not integrated into a complete sentence, while “While” introduces a fragment rather than a balanced clause. The overview mentions similar patterns but does not clearly explain them. To improve, group the categories into clear comparisons, use complete sentences, and ensure each paragraph develops one coherent point from beginning to end.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some relevant chart vocabulary, including “proportion,” “constituted the largest share,” “decreased,” and “rose,” which helps communicate basic comparisons. However, the range is limited and several spelling and word-choice errors are noticeable, such as “illustartes,” “precentages,” “forgien,” and “proporton.” Some expressions are also unnatural or imprecise: “the most significant proportion by far” and “sharply rose” do not fit these modest changes particularly well. Repetition of “percentage,” “share,” and “making up” further restricts the range. Aim for accurate spelling and use precise reporting language such as “accounted for,” “increased slightly,” and “fell from … to …” to describe the data.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response attempts a mixture of simple and more complex forms, including “that who can speak” and “While, two other languages proportion increased…,” but these constructions are often faulty. There are frequent problems with sentence structure and clause formation: “Followed by, spanish ranks second” is a fragment, and the final sentence is cut off. Agreement and article use are also inconsistent, as in “student who speak” and “percentage of student.” The past-time data are sometimes described in the present tense, for example “ranks,” and the year is incorrectly written as 2001 in two places. These errors sometimes make relationships between ideas difficult to follow. Practise complete comparison sentences and maintain consistent past-tense reporting.

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.