The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999.
Sample Response
The table illustrates the percentage of various types of families who were living in poverty in Australia in the year 1999.
Sole-parent householdsThe sole parent had the highest percentagepercentage of share among all types, at 21%i.e., 21%, and their number wasthe population of them is 232,000, while 19% of single people without children lived in povertyfollowed by 19% who were single with no children. Couples with children had a poverty rate of 12%had a 12% share, but their number in poverty was the highesttheir population in terms of numbers was highest among all types. Furthermore, single aged peopleFurther single aged person, aged couples and couples with no childrenaged couple and couple with no children had relatively similar poverty rateshad almost equal percentages, but the population of couples with no children had around about four times as many people asfour times more population than single aged people or aged couplesa single aged person and aged couple.
Overall, 1,837,000 people were living in poverty in Australiaamong the whole population of Australia. Of theseOut of them, couples with children had the highest population in terms of numbers, but in proportional terms, sole-parent householdsin terms of sole share, the parent had the highest one.
Why this response received Band 6.0
The response accurately identifies the two most important contrasts: sole-parent households had the highest poverty proportion, while couples with children represented the largest number of people. Its main limitation is thin supporting coverage, with several categories grouped loosely and few exact figures supplied. The best improvement is to add selective, accurate comparisons for the aged and childless household groups while refining awkward phrasing.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Achievement
The key overall patterns are accurate and relevant, but several household categories receive limited numerical support.
Include the overall 11% figure and selected figures for the aged and childless groups to substantiate the comparisons.
Coherence and Cohesion
The response progresses coherently from an introduction through details to an overview, despite some cumbersome referencing and repetition.
Place the overview before the detailed figures and group categories through clearer comparative sentences.
Lexical Resource
Vocabulary is sufficient for the task, but awkward collocations such as percentage of share and more population recur.
Use precise expressions such as poverty rate, number of people, and four times as many people.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A mix of simple and complex sentences communicates the comparisons clearly, although agreement, article, and phrasing errors remain noticeable.
Check subject-verb agreement and revise long sentences so each comparison has a clear grammatical subject.
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 table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999.
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.