Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 15 · 2026-09-21

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 5.5)

As far as this chart is concerned, the given chart illustrates the outcomes of a survey about coffee and tea buying and drinking habits of people in five cities of Australia.

Overall, it is clear that there are some noticeable trends and differences. Some aspects increase while others decrease and a few remain relatively stable.

People who bought instant coffee in last weeks in Hobart, Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne, Sydney are 54%,50%,53%,48% and 45% respectively. However, 63%, 49%, 55%, 63% and 61% are the people who went to a cafe for coffee or tea in last 4 weeks in Hobart, Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney respectively. In Hobart, Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney had the percentages of 38%, 34%, 34%, 42% and 44% of the people who bought fresh coffee in last 4 weeks respectively.

Hobart and Melbourne percentages remain equal and highest for the people who went to a cafe for coffee or tea in last 4 weeks. However, in Brisbane and Adelaide only 34% preferred to buy fresh coffee in last 4 weeks respectively. Furthermore, Hobart had the highest percentage of about 54% for people who bought instant coffee in last 4 weeks.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5

The student attempts to address the prompt by reporting figures for coffee and tea habits across five Australian cities. However, the response falls short of fully satisfying the requirements of Task 1 because the overview is extremely vague ('Some aspects increase while others decrease and a few remain relatively stable'), which does not accurately summarise the actual data trends. Furthermore, the body paragraphs rely heavily on listing raw numerical data point-by-point in long, monotonous strings (e.g., 'Hobart, Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney are 54%, 50%, 53%, 48% and 45% respectively'), rather than selecting and reporting the main features and making meaningful comparisons. While some data is accurate, the lack of a proper, insightful overview and the mechanical listing of data restrict this to Band 5.5.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0

The response is organised into separate paragraphs, including an introduction, an overview, and body paragraphs. However, the progression within the body paragraphs is severely hindered by repetitive phrasing and clunky listing structures. The excessive use of the word 'respectively' and long strings of city names make the reading experience mechanical and unnatural. Cohesive devices are either overused or handled clumsily, as seen in the repeated transitions. While the overall text holds together structurally, the logical flow and coherence between sentences are noticeably disrupted by the heavy reliance on listing data rather than grouping and comparing information fluidly.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.0

The student uses a basic and repetitive vocabulary range that is mostly adequate for conveying simple data, but lacks flexibility and precision. Phrases such as 'outcomes of a survey', 'people who bought', and 'highest percentage' are repeated frequently throughout the text. There is very little attempt to use less common lexical items or paraphrasing. While spelling is generally accurate, the vocabulary choices remain at a functional level without demonstrating the range or stylistic awareness required for higher band scores. Word choice is safe and descriptive, but restricted.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

The writer demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, though sentence construction is frequently awkward and repetitive. There are noticeable grammatical and punctuation slips, such as missing articles and awkward word order in complex clauses (e.g., 'In Hobart, Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney had the percentages of...'). While the errors do not completely impede communication because the numbers remain understandable, they occur with enough frequency to show a lack of consistent control over more complex structures. Simple sentences are generally clear, but attempts at longer descriptive sentences often result in ungrammatical phrasing.

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.