Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 15 · 2026-10-14

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 6.0)

The bar chart illustrates the buying and consumption of coffee and tea patter of among inhabitanst of Austrialian cities Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelide, Hobart spaning a four week period.

Overall, with the expection of Adelaide, visiting cafe for coffee and tea was the most popular activity in all cities.

Melbourne has the highest percentage of cafe goars at around 63%,closely followed by Hobart at approximetely 62%. Sydney had a relatively had proportion at roughly 61%. Brisbane and Adelaide both were less visitor of cafe at nearly 55% and 49%.

When it came to buying instant coffee, Hobart has the largest percentage nearly 55%, followed by Brisbane around 52%. Sydney and Melbourne had similar figures between 45% and 48%. In Adelaide, the proportion of people choosing instant coffee hoverd around 50%.

In terms of purchasing coffee, Sydney led with 44%, followed by Melbourne at approximately 42%. Brisbane, Adelaide and Hobart had a lower percentage, with Brisbane and Adelaide both were around 34% and Hobart is nearly 38%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

The response identifies the main pattern: café visits were the leading activity in four cities, while Adelaide was the exception, and it reports the broad rankings for all three categories. Most figures are consistent with the chart, including Melbourne and Hobart’s high café attendance and Hobart’s leading instant-coffee figure. This gives the report a clear, relevant overview. Some comparisons are less fully developed: for example, the fresh-coffee figures could be contrasted with instant coffee or café visits to highlight that fresh coffee was the least popular category in most cities. Also, the overview could state the overall contrast more precisely. The main features are covered, but more selective comparison and clearer synthesis would make the account more complete.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a coherent overall arrangement: an introduction and overview are followed by paragraphs on café visits, instant coffee and fresh coffee. This makes the information easy to locate, and phrases such as “When it came to” and “In terms of” signal the shift between categories. However, the organisation is mainly a sequence of separate data summaries rather than a connected comparison across categories and cities. Some linking within sentences is awkward, as in “Brisbane and Adelaide both were around 34%,” and the overview’s “with the expection of Adelaide” could be expressed more clearly. To strengthen progression, group related contrasts together and use precise referencing so each comparison follows naturally from the previous one.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

The response uses relevant task vocabulary, including “percentage,” “proportion,” “followed by,” and “purchasing,” and it varies some descriptions of the figures. However, spelling and word-choice errors are noticeable and sometimes make the reader pause: “inhabitanst,” “Austrialian,” “cafe goars,” and “hoverd” are examples. Several expressions are also unnatural or imprecise, such as “had a relatively had proportion” and “less visitor of cafe.” These issues limit the accuracy and flexibility of the vocabulary, despite the range of basic chart-reporting terms. Focus on accurate spelling and natural collocations for describing proportions and participation; this will make the comparisons clearer and more professional.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

The response attempts a mix of sentence forms, including an overview clause beginning “with the exception of Adelaide” and several comparison sentences. The meaning is generally recoverable, but some grammatical errors recur. Tense is inconsistent in “Melbourne has” and “Hobart has” alongside past-tense descriptions such as “Sydney had”; use a consistent past tense for the survey period. There are also faulty constructions, for example “Brisbane and Adelaide both were less visitor” and “Brisbane and Adelaide both were around 34%,” where the sentence structure does not clearly express the intended comparison. Punctuation spacing is uneven, as in “63%,closely.” More reliable control of verb forms and sentence patterns would improve accuracy while retaining the attempted variety.

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.