The graph below shows the percentage of urban/suburban and rural households in a European country that had Internet access between 1999 and 2004.
Sample Response
The bar graph shows the percentages of urban/suburban and rural householdscity and rural households with internet access in a European countrywith the internet access in a European country from 1999 to 2004. Generally speaking, a lower percentage of rural householdsfewer percentages of rural households had the internet connection than the percentage of urban/suburban householdsthan that of city people and overall internet access increased markedlyinternet accessibility enhanced remarkably over timeover the time. In 1999, merely 2% of rural households2% rural household in this European country had access to the internet while around 15% of urban/suburban households15% city dwellers had this facility. In 2000Next year, one out of every 20 rural householdshouses gained this access while almost one-third of urban/suburban householdsone-third urban and suburban families were connected to the internetglobal internet. After two years, half of the city dwellers gained internet access while it was as small as 15% for rural citizens. Over the next two yearsNext two years, the percentages of households in rural areas that had internet accesswho joined this network increased sharply, from 15% to 35%. The ratio of households in urban and suburban areas with the internet access rose to roughly 55%, a slower extension than that of rural households during the last three years. The ratio of homes, both in cities and rural areas, with access to the internet was quite negligible in 1999 but improved dramatically within next 5 years.
Why this response received Band 6.5
The report identifies both central trends and selects generally accurate figures, with clear direct comparisons between urban and rural access. Its main weakness is imprecise language and time referencing—phrases such as fewer percentages, after two years and next two years make otherwise sound data harder to follow—so the highest priority is to group the years explicitly and use precise proportion and growth language in separate overview and detail paragraphs.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Achievement
The overview accurately identifies rising access and the persistent urban lead, while the selected start, midpoint and end figures represent the main trends well.
Anchor each comparison to named years and include the 2001 or 2003 values to make the differing growth patterns more fully supported.
Coherence and Cohesion
The report follows a broadly chronological progression and uses comparisons effectively, but vague time references and the absence of paragraphing weaken organisation.
Separate the overview from two clearly dated detail groups, such as 1999–2001 and 2002–2004.
Lexical Resource
There is enough range to describe change and comparison, but frequent unnatural choices such as fewer percentages, accessibility enhanced and slower extension reduce precision.
Prefer standard chart language such as a lower proportion, access increased, and a slower rate of growth.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A mix of simple and complex sentences communicates the data clearly, although article, plural, preposition and comparison errors occur frequently.
Check noun phrases and comparisons, especially 2% of rural households, one-third of urban families and lower than the urban figure.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Academic Writing Task 1
The graph below shows the percentage of urban/suburban and rural households in a European country that had Internet access between 1999 and 2004.
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.