Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-09-17

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The graph below gives information about the percentage of the population in four Asian countries living in cities from 1970 to 2020, with predictions for 2030 and 2040. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.

 

Student answer (Band 5.0)

The line graph tracks the percentage of the population in four Asian countries living in cities from the year 1970 upto to 2020 and it also shows the predictions for 2030 and 2040.

Overall, it is evident that Malaysia had the most percentage of population whereas, Thailand have the less amount of population comparing with the other countries.

With reference to the line graph Philippines had about 31% of population at the beginning of 1970 and it escalated upto 50% and went down for few years. At the year of 2010 it was at 40% and went from there and it is predicted that it would reach above 50% at 2040. By analysing Malaysia's line graph we can see that, from the beginning of 1970 that country had only about 30% and it sky rocketed to 70% at 2020 and it will be increasing for the next decade too.

Furthermore, Thailand had the less amount of population and it was close to 20% at the year of 1970 and it increased a bit and will be having a few more increase in the coming years. Indonesia had the less population and it was between 10% to 20% and it kept increasing until 2020 while comparing to other two countries and it is predicted that it will increase in the coming years.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0

The student covers all four countries and mentions the time frame from 1970 to 2040, including predictions. However, the overview is weak, containing inaccuracies and unnatural phrasing (e.g., claiming Malaysia had 'the most percentage of population' throughout or stating Thailand and Indonesia both had 'the less amount of population'). Furthermore, the specific data points reported are frequently imprecise or factually incorrect when compared to the source graph (e.g., stating Philippines was at 40% in 2010 when the chart shows roughly 42.5%, or misinterpreting trends). The response attempts to summarise the information and make comparisons, but the lack of accuracy in reporting main features and the flawed overview keep this at Band 5.0.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0

The text is divided into an introduction, an overview, and body paragraphs, showing a basic attempt at paragraphing. However, the overall progression is hindered by repetitive and unpolished transitional phrases (e.g., 'With reference to the line graph', 'By analysing Malaysia's line graph we can see that', 'Furthermore'). Cohesive devices are sometimes used mechanically or inaccurately. Referencing is also occasionally unclear, such as pronoun use and repetitive phrasing ('had the less amount of population'). The logical flow between sentences within paragraphs lacks cohesion, resulting in a somewhat disjointed reading experience. This aligns with Band 5.0 descriptors.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.0

The vocabulary used is relatively basic and repetitive, relying heavily on simple phrases like 'percentage of population', 'went down', 'kept increasing', and 'the less amount of population'. There are noticeable lexical errors and awkward collocations, such as 'upto to', 'most percentage of population', 'sky rocketed' (spelled as two words), and 'few more increase'. While the language is minimally adequate to convey the general topic of urbanisation, the range is limited and repetition of terms like 'population' and 'increase' constrains the score to Band 5.0.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0

The response displays a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, but attempts at complex sentences often contain errors or awkward phrasing (e.g., 'At the year of 2010 it was at 40% and went from there and it is predicted that...'). Punctuation is basic, with run-on sentences joined by coordinating conjunctions like 'and'. Frequent grammatical errors, such as preposition misuse ('at the year of', 'comparing with'), comparative errors ('the less amount'), and spelling/word-formation slips ('upto to'), cause some difficulty for the reader and prevent the text from achieving a higher band.

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.