Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-31

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 pie charts illustrate the proportions of British students in England who were able to speak other languages in addition to English at University in 2000 and 2010.

Overall, Spanish and French was much spoken by the students but it was reduced later, followed with the most number of students who did not able to speak any other language increased later. However, there was an increase in another language and people who knew about more than one language. German language remained as it is.

In 2002, students who had no idea about other language covered around 30%, followed by nearly 20% of scholars who spoke Spanish. Also, approximately 15% of the people were able to speak French, and 10% of the students had an expertise in German. However, people who were able speak more than one language shared nearly 10%.

In 2010, the students were increased who had no idea about other language, at 35%. Spanish and French language use was reduced to 10% by students. German language remained same with around 10%. However, usage of another language and people who were able to speak two other language increased up to 20% and 15% respectively.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You cover the main categories in both years and give a clear overview of the key shifts: Spanish and French decline, the share with no other language rises, and the figures for another language and two other languages increase. Most reported figures match the charts. However, the overview is somewhat unclear in “Spanish and French was much spoken,” and the 2000 paragraph mistakenly says “In 2002.” Also, “people who were able to speak more than one language” is reported as 10%, but this appears to refer only to the two-other-languages category; the separate “another language” category is not clearly distinguished there. The main features are relevant, though some comparisons could be expressed more precisely and fully.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a sensible four-part structure: introduction, overview, and one paragraph for each year. This makes the information easy to locate, and the contrast between 2000 and 2010 is generally clear. You also use linking expressions such as “Overall,” “followed by,” and “However.” At times, though, these links feel mechanical or do not show the relationship accurately; for example, “However” introduces the increase in other-language categories, which is not a contrast to the preceding point. Some references are also unclear, particularly “people who were able to speak more than one language,” which could mean either the “another language” or “two other languages” group. More direct comparisons between years would improve progression.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use enough topic vocabulary to report the chart, including “proportions,” “remained,” “reduced,” and “increased.” However, several choices are imprecise or unnatural for describing language ability. “Had no idea about other language” suggests lack of knowledge rather than inability to speak another language, while “expertise in German” overstates what the chart shows. Phrases such as “Spanish and French was much spoken” and “the students were increased” also show limited control of collocation and word forms. Aim for neutral, accurate chart language and avoid replacing the chart’s categories with interpretations. This would make your meaning more precise and reduce the effort required of the reader.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more developed sentences, and the overall meaning is usually recoverable. However, errors in agreement, verb forms, and sentence construction occur across the response. For example, “Spanish and French was” needs a plural verb, while “the students were increased” uses an incorrect passive construction; “students who did not able to speak” also needs a grammatical verb pattern. There are further problems with articles and plurals in phrases such as “other language” and “two other language.” These errors sometimes make the relationships between ideas less clear. Work on accurate basic sentence patterns first, then build complexity with controlled clauses and consistent past-tense reporting.

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.