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 given pie chart illustrates the percentage of students from Britain at an educational institution in England who had the skill of speaking multiple language that too with English in 2000 and 2010.

Overall, the majority of British students didn't speak any other language than English, with only 20 Spanish speakers in 2000. Later in ten years, the proportion of no other language increased.

In 2002, most of the students had not learnt any other language. However, some of them had Spanish and French as their second language, with 20 and 15 speakers. While ten of them had the skill of speaking two other languages.

In 2010, the number of people speaking no other language and two other langauge resurged by 5 speakers each. Another language speakers arose by the same percentage.

In conclusion, many of the scholars in both years only knew English, but some were also interested in speaking Spanish and French.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

You identify the two years and give a relevant overall point: the share speaking no other language rose, while Spanish and French are mentioned as common additional languages. However, the report only partially covers the chart. It incorrectly refers to “In 2002” instead of 2000, and “20 Spanish speakers” confuses a percentage with a number of people. Several important figures and comparisons are omitted, including German, the fall in Spanish from 20% to 10%, and the rise in “another language” from 15% to 20%. The overview also says students were “interested” in languages, which the chart does not show. To strengthen the response, report the proportions accurately and summarise the main changes across both charts.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, moving from an introduction and overview to separate descriptions of the two years and a conclusion. This gives the reader some organisation. However, progression is weakened by the incorrect “In 2002” reference and by repeating the idea that many students spoke only English in both the overview and conclusion. The paragraph about 2010 lists changes without clearly comparing them with the corresponding 2000 figures, and “In conclusion” introduces no new summary. Linking words such as “However” and “While” are used, but the relationship between the ideas is not always clear. Group the key comparisons by trend, and use clear references to the relevant year and category.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use some task-relevant vocabulary, including “percentage,” “proportion,” “speaking,” and “increased,” and the meaning is generally understandable. There are also attempts at less common wording, such as “resurged” and “arose,” but these are not natural choices for describing chart movements. “Resurged by 5 speakers” is especially unclear because the data are percentages, not counts. Other phrases, including “had the skill of speaking multiple language” and “interested in speaking,” are awkward or imprecise for this report. Spelling errors such as “langauge” are noticeable. Build a more accurate range of chart language, using terms such as “accounted for,” “rose,” “fell,” and “percentage points,” and check word forms and spelling.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

The response includes both simple sentences and attempts at more complex structures, for example, “While ten of them had the skill of speaking two other languages.” However, this is a fragment because the “while” clause is not joined to a main clause. There are also errors in number and sentence construction, as in “multiple language,” and the opening sentence is difficult to follow because several ideas are packed into one structure. Tense and reference are not consistently controlled, particularly in the description of the chart years. These errors do not prevent the reader from understanding the general topic, but they make some details less clear. Practise complete comparisons with a clear subject and verb, and check plurals, clause boundaries, and year references.

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.