Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-28

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 6.5)

The two pie charts illustrate the percentage of British students at a specific university in England who can speak other languages in addition to English, between 2000 and 2010.

Overall, the proportion of students who can speak only the English language increased, French and Spanish speakers declined while the other language speakers also grew. The figures for the German language speakers remain unchanged between 2000 and 2010.

In 2000, 30% of students could speak English only, increased by 5% in 2010 and reached 35%. The number of students who can speak Spanish and French decreased from 20% in 2000 to 10% in 2010 and from 15% in 2000 to 10% in 2010 respectively.

The percentage of students who speak one or two other languages grew. The number of other language speakers rose from 15% in 2000 to 20% in 2010. Students who speak two other languages follows the same trend, rising from 10% in 2000 to 15% in 2010. German lanuage speakers remains unchanged at 10% over the period of decade.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

The response gives a clear overview of the main changes and reports the key figures accurately: the no-other-language category rises from 30% to 35%, Spanish and French decline, and German remains at 10%. It also covers the growth in both “another language” and “two other languages,” supporting the comparison with figures. This addresses the task well and selects relevant features. One imprecision is describing the 30% category as students who “could speak English only”; the chart labels it “No other language,” meaning they spoke no language besides English. The overview would be more precise if it used that category label and distinguished the two declining language groups more explicitly. Overall, the information is well supported, though a little more exact phrasing would strengthen the report.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response is organised into a clear introduction, overview and two detail paragraphs. Its progression is logical: it first summarises the broad trends, then reports the declining and increasing categories. Linking phrases such as “Overall,” “In 2000,” and “The percentage … grew” help guide the reader, and the comparisons are generally easy to follow. To make cohesion more flexible and precise, avoid repeating similar sentence openings and connect related figures more smoothly—for example, group the increases in “another language” and “two other languages” in one comparative sentence. Some references, such as “the other language speakers,” are slightly vague because the chart has separate categories for another language and two other languages. This is coherent overall, but cohesion and referencing are not consistently polished.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

The vocabulary is adequate for describing the chart, with useful reporting language such as “proportion,” “declined,” “rose,” and “remains unchanged.” These choices communicate the main trends, and the writer attempts some variation rather than relying entirely on basic verbs. However, several phrases are imprecise or repetitive: “English language” is not the chart’s category, while “other language speakers” can blur two distinct groups. “The number of students” is also less suitable when reporting percentages. There are spelling and word-form slips, including “lanuage,” and some collocations sound unnatural, such as “over the period of decade.” More precise chart vocabulary and careful proofreading would improve flexibility and accuracy without changing the clear meaning.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

The response uses a mixture of simple and more developed sentence forms, including comparisons with “from … to …” and a compound overview sentence. Most meanings remain clear, but some grammatical errors recur. In “30% … increased by 5% … and reached 35%,” the subject is the proportion, so the sentence needs a clearer structure such as “the proportion increased by five percentage points.” Tense and agreement are inconsistent in “students who can speak” and “speakers remain unchanged,” where past forms are needed for the 2000–2010 comparison. The sentence “Students who speak two other languages follows” also has subject–verb disagreement. There are occasional spacing and punctuation issues. Greater control of past-tense reporting and agreement would make the range more accurate.

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.