Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-27

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 5.5)

The pie charts illustrate the proportion of British students at one university in England who were able to speak different languages in addition to English, in 2000 and 2010.

Overall, the students who speak no other language accounted for the largest proportion in both years, whereas Spanish was popular after English among the students in 2000. Notably, the students who speak German only stood at the same proportion in both years.

In 2000, the British students who speak no other language accounted for the largest proportion at 30%, while Spanish accounted for the 20%, considerably both categories made up half of the total. The figure for another language and French only stood at 15%, similarly the students who speak two other languages and German only was responsible for 10%.

In 2010, the students who speak no other language accounted for the highest proportion at 35% and another language stood at 20%. Importantly, the students who speak German only, Spanish only, and French only stood at the same proportion at 10%, while the British students who speak two other languages stood at 15% only.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify the main overall pattern: students with no other language formed the largest group in both years, and German-only speakers remained at 10%. Most figures are reported accurately, including the 2000 shares for Spanish, French and other languages, and the 2010 figures for no other language and two other languages. However, the overview is incomplete: it calls Spanish popular in 2000 but does not highlight the notable fall from 20% to 10%, or the increases in “another language” and “two other languages.” The comparison that two 2000 categories made up half the total is relevant, but the report mainly lists figures rather than selecting and comparing the most important changes. A clearer overview of the shifts between years would make the response more complete and developed.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, an overview and separate paragraphs for each year. This makes the information easy to locate, and transitions such as “Overall,” “In 2000” and “In 2010” help signal the stages of the report. However, the progression is somewhat mechanical because the body paragraphs mostly list categories within each year rather than organising comparisons across the two years. Some linking is also awkward: “considerably both categories made up half of the total” does not clearly connect the figures, and “while” in the final paragraph joins information without establishing a strong contrast. Grouping the unchanged and changing categories together would create a clearer line of comparison and reduce the list-like effect.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant vocabulary for describing charts, including “proportion,” “accounted for,” “stood at” and “largest.” These choices make the topic clear, and the language is generally understandable. However, the range is limited by repeated use of “accounted for” and “stood at,” while some combinations are unnatural or imprecise. For example, “Spanish was popular after English” does not clearly express that Spanish was the most common additional language in 2000, and “accounted for the 20%” uses an unnecessary article. “Responsible for 10%” is also less natural for describing a chart share. More precise terms such as “share,” “percentage” and “rose/fell” would help you compare the data more flexibly and accurately.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You use a mixture of simple statements and longer sentences, and the main figures and categories can generally be understood. The opening sentence and the sentence noting that German-only speakers remained unchanged are clear. However, errors in sentence construction and agreement recur. In “considerably both categories made up half of the total,” the adverb is placed incorrectly and the relationship between the clauses is unclear. In “the students who speak two other languages and German only was responsible,” the compound subject does not agree with “was.” The repeated present-tense forms “students who speak” are also less suitable for describing data from past years; use “spoke” or a noun phrase such as “students speaking.” Greater control of clause structure, agreement and past-tense reporting would improve accuracy.

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.