Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · 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 6.0)

The charts depict the percentage of British students who were fluent in other languages in addition to English in the years 2000 and 2010.

Overall, the spoken capabilities varied across these two particular years but the highest portion of the students remain of those which do not speak any other language, while german only students remains the lowest and most consistant in both years.

In the year 2000 students who spoke only english remained the highest with the percentage of 30% while the Spanish spoken students coming second with the percentage of 20%. German only and the students who spoke two other languages remained the same with both having the percentage of 10% each. Same is the case with students who were able to speak French and for the students who only spoke French carrying the percentage of 15% each.

In the year 2010, no other language protion remain the highest with the percentage of 35% while the students who also spoke Spanish, French and the one that spoke german only remained the same at the percentage of 10%. The students who spoke two other languages have a percentage of 15% while the students another language not mentioned highes claimed the second spot in term of proportion with 20%

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You identify the main pattern that students reporting no other language formed the largest group in both years, and you include several relevant figures. The 2000 figures for Spanish, German and two other languages are also reported accurately. However, some comparisons are unclear or inaccurate: in 2010, Spanish fell to 10%, but French was also 10% and German remained at 10%; the response groups these together without explaining the changes from 2000. The statement that German-only students were the lowest is not correct in 2000, when German and two other languages were both at 10%. Also, “students who spoke only English” is an imprecise description of the no-other-language category. A clearer overview and more direct year-to-year comparisons would make the key features more fully developed.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a clear overall arrangement: an introduction, an overview, and separate paragraphs for 2000 and 2010. This makes the information easy to follow, and the repeated year-based structure provides a basic progression. Some linking and reference, however, are awkward or repetitive. For example, “remained the same” is used several times, although the categories being compared are not always made clear, and “Same is the case” does not clearly identify which figures it refers to. The final sentence also runs together several comparisons without a clear distinction between the categories. To strengthen the organisation, group figures by whether they rose, fell or stayed stable, and use explicit references such as “the proportion speaking French” rather than “the students.”

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant vocabulary for describing charts, including “percentage,” “proportion,” “highest,” and “second spot,” so the reader can generally understand the comparisons. However, the range is limited and several choices are inaccurate or unnatural for this task. “Fluent” suggests a level of language ability that the chart does not measure, while “spoken capabilities” is an awkward way to describe the categories. Phrases such as “no other language portion” and “students another language not mentioned” are unclear, and “most consistant” contains a spelling error. Aim for precise category labels and natural chart language, such as “students who spoke no other language” and “accounted for.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more extended sentence forms, and the overall meaning is usually recoverable. However, errors in agreement, verb forms and sentence construction occur in several places. For example, “the highest portion … remain” should use a past-tense verb agreeing with “portion,” and “German only students remains” has a plural subject with a singular verb. The phrase “the students who only spoke French carrying the percentage” is not a complete, well-formed clause, while “the students who spoke two other languages have a percentage” shifts tense from the past description. Some sentences also combine multiple comparisons in ways that make their grammatical relationships difficult to follow. Use consistent past tense and check subject–verb agreement, especially in longer sentences.

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.