Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 15 · 2026-08-21
IELTS Writing Task 1 question
The chart below shows the results of a survey about people’s coffee and tea buying and drinking habits in five Australian cities.
Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
Student answer (Band 5.0)
Coffee drinking habit is quite essential nowadays, some people take it as a boost drink for energy and some just are casual consumers.
The main highlight in given chart is the difference of bought fresh coffee and people went to cafe for coffee or tea, people went to cafe for coffee is twice in percentage than of bought fresh coffee, many time visiting cafe for coffee is not the only purpose for the people but the environment offered at cafes especially for people who works outside the office is quite welcoming, this main difference can be seen though out all the five cities of Australia as given in the chart.
Instant coffee on the other hand has its own features, for example, instant coffee is ready to go, it saves time and can be easily found anywhere, like grocery shops wending machines and other small places, also. Taking the example of Adelaide, here folks choose slightly more instant coffee than visiting a cafe.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 4.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 4.0
The response fails to adequately address the task requirements. While it mentions coffee and tea, it does not provide a clear summary of the data presented in the chart. The response lacks specific figures or comparisons between the five cities, which is essential for an Academic Task 1 report. Instead of reporting the data, the student provides subjective commentary on why people visit cafes. To improve, you must focus on identifying the key trends, such as the highest and lowest percentages across the cities, and use the provided data to support your observations rather than speculating on social habits.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0
The essay lacks a logical structure. The introduction is not clearly separated from the body, and the paragraphs do not follow a clear progression of ideas. There is a lack of cohesive devices to link sentences and ideas; for example, the transition between the general observation and the specific example of Adelaide is abrupt. The use of punctuation is also problematic, with several run-on sentences that make the text difficult to follow. Improving the use of linking words such as 'furthermore', 'in contrast', or 'consequently' would help create a more professional flow.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The vocabulary is quite basic and repetitive. Phrases like 'boost drink' and 'ready to go' are informal and not suitable for an academic report. There are also errors in word choice, such as 'wending machines' (vending machines) and 'folks' (which is too informal). To reach a higher band, you should use more precise, academic vocabulary to describe trends, such as 'proportion', 'significant', 'fluctuation', or 'predominant'. Expanding your range of topic-specific vocabulary related to data analysis will significantly improve your score.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0
The response contains frequent grammatical errors that occasionally impede communication. There are issues with subject-verb agreement, such as 'people who works' instead of 'people who work', and sentence structure, particularly the use of comma splices. The range of structures is limited, relying mostly on simple sentences. To improve, focus on mastering complex sentence structures, such as using relative clauses or subordinating conjunctions, and ensure that your punctuation is accurate to avoid run-on 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.
