Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-22
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)
Introduction:
The charts shows that the average ration of British students in 2000 and 2010.This is those student who were able tu speak multiples of languages to English.We find the students ratio which speak other language in English,2000.On the other hand we calculate the average in 2010.
Overview:
The diagram illustrate that we have many other languages which we speak in university.For example we have French,German,Spanish and few another language to learn. Moreover, it also help in communication and boost the mind.
Paragraph:
As the diagram shows,in 2000 the student of this one university speak only English, no other language they learn and its ratio is approximately 30 %.After that 20% of students speak Spanish.Moreover,15% of peoples learn french and another language.The least amount of language which students learn is German and other two language.
On the other hand, the ratio of the no other language become increased because of study pressure.Furthermore,20% of humans learn another language and 15% of students communicate in two other language.At least 10% of students seeks Spanish,French and German for development of culture connections and for built the personality skills.
Conclusion:
In conclusion,we should learn more languages to improve our personality skills,boost our mind ,sharing thoughts and for culture connection.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 4.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.0
The response identifies several relevant figures, including 30% with no other language in 2000, 20% speaking Spanish, and the 2010 figures of 20% for another language and 15% for two other languages. However, it only partially reports the charts and does not give a clear, accurate overview of the main changes. The statement that the proportion with no other language increased is correct, but the key shift from Spanish (20% to 10%) and the rise in “another language” and “two other languages” are not clearly compared across both years. Some details are inaccurate or unclear: French and another language were each 15% in 2000, while German and two other languages were each 10%. The explanations about study pressure and personality development are not shown by the charts. Focus on describing and comparing the data rather than adding causes or advice.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0
The response has separate sections for an introduction, overview, data paragraph and conclusion, so the reader can recognise an intended structure. It also uses basic linking expressions such as “Moreover,” “After that” and “On the other hand.” However, the progression is not consistently logical: the overview discusses the benefits of learning languages rather than summarising the chart’s main trends, and the conclusion gives advice instead of drawing together the comparisons. Some links are inaccurate or repetitive, particularly “On the other hand,” which does not clearly signal a contrast between the two years. Group the information by year or by categories that rise, fall or remain unchanged, and use linking phrases to make those relationships explicit.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.0
The response uses some task-related vocabulary, including “ratio,” “students,” “Spanish,” “French” and “German,” and attempts phrases such as “culture connections.” However, the range is limited and several word choices or collocations make the meaning unclear, for example “average ration,” “speak multiples of languages to English” and “the least amount of language.” “Humans” is also unsuitable for describing the chart’s student group, while “development of culture connections” is awkward. Use precise chart language such as “proportion,” “spoke,” “language category” and “remained unchanged.” Avoid repeating general phrases about personality and communication, since they do not describe the data. More accurate collocations would make the comparisons easier to understand.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0
The response attempts both simple and longer sentences, and some basic statements communicate the intended figures. However, the range is limited, and errors in sentence formation, agreement, tense, articles and punctuation occur frequently enough to make parts difficult to follow. For example, “The charts shows” has subject–verb disagreement, while “the student of this one university speak” has problems with number and tense. The opening sentence fragments and the construction “This is those student who were able tu speak” also obscure the meaning. Punctuation spacing and sentence boundaries are inconsistent. Practise accurate past-tense reporting and plural forms, for example, “In 2000, 30% of students spoke no other language,” then build comparisons with controlled structures such as “This figure rose to…” or “By contrast, Spanish fell to…”.
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.