The charts below shows the proportion of income spent on food and other goods across 3 European nations from 1998 to 2008.

Same-task comparison

This response is estimated at Band 6.0. Can you write a better one?

Write yours and get clear feedback on all four criteria.

  • Closest to official scores
  • What to fix on each criterion
  • Feedback in about 20 seconds · free
Start writing this task

Sample Response

1

The bar charts illustrate the proportion of earnings spent on food and other goods across France, Germany,and England between 1998 and 2008. Overall, over the ten-year periodas time went on, these three countries all witnessed a notable rise in the proportion of income spent on food and other commoditiesgoods, with France allocating the highest proportion of income togave more attention on the spending of food and other goods. Specifically,expenditure in France registeredthe proportion of spending in France witnessed the most notable growth from 1998 to 2008, where the proportions spent on food and other goods rose from 15% and 9% respectively to 40%,which the figures of food and other goods both rose from 15 and 9 to 40. In addition, the striking growth in expenditure onNext,the striking growth of other goods in England followed closely after France,with an increase from 8% to 35%with the increase from 9 to 35,more than double its food expendituremore than two times of the spending on food.The smallest increase in both food and other goods was in Germany,where the proportion only rose from 25% to 30% for food and 17% to 24% for other goodsfrom 25 to 30 and 18 to 23 respectively, which was the same asrespectively,the same as the growth in spending on food in England.

Overall assessment

Why this response received Band 6.0

The response successfully highlights the overall upward trend across all three countries and reports key figures from the charts. However, grammar and sentence structure are limited by frequent comma splices and incorrect participle constructions, while punctuation spacing requires attention. Prioritize improving complex sentence control and clause connection to enhance clarity.

Band score breakdown

IELTS Writing Criteria Scores

TA

Task Achievement

6.0
Scoring rule

Key trends and overall increases are identified, though phrasing choices occasionally obscure data comparisons.

Next step

Ensure comparisons between categories and years are described using precise data language rather than subjective expressions like giving attention.

CC

Coherence and Cohesion

6.0
Scoring rule

Information is arranged logically into distinct sections, but missing spaces after commas create minor presentation flaws.

Next step

Standardize formatting by ensuring consistent punctuation spacing and using clearer linking words to connect data points.

LR

Lexical Resource

6.0
Scoring rule

A sufficient vocabulary range is used to report proportions, but occasional inappropriate collocations appear.

Next step

Incorporate more natural data phrases, such as allocating income or expenditure proportions, to avoid awkward word choices.

GRA

Grammatical Range and Accuracy

5.5
Scoring rule

A mix of structure types is attempted, but frequent comma splices and ungrammatical participle clauses hinder accuracy.

Next step

Practice using proper relative clauses and conjunctions instead of joining independent clauses with commas.