Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 16 · 2026-09-30

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The diagram below shows the manufacturing process for making sugar from sugar cane.

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

How sugar is produced from sugar cane

Student answer (Band 5.5)

The process diagram shows the manufacturing process for making sugar from sugar cane.

Overall, The process included seven stages of procedure, which started from the growth of cane and ends with dying and cooling.

Firstly, the process starts from growing sugar cane which took 12 to 18 months and then the next step is harvesting and it used machines or by hands. The next phase is to crushed sugar canes with machine to get juice.

On the fourth stage limstone filters are used to purify it. And then the next step is evaporation where juice concerted into syrup when it was heated.

The second last phase is centrifuge which seprated the sugar crystals from syrup. In the last step it moved into big drums where the process of drying and Colling of sugar started.

The sugar was made with different seven stages and all these stages are very difficult specially, evaporation and separation of Crystals.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

The student covers all key stages of the sugar manufacturing process from growing to drying and cooling, successfully reporting the main features such as the 12 to 18 months growth period, harvesting methods, crushing, purification with limestone, evaporation, and centrifugation. An overview is attempted in the second sentence ("The process included seven stages of procedure..."), though it contains grammatical awkwardness. While the main steps are sequenced correctly, the conclusion includes personal opinion and commentary ("all these stages are very difficult specially, evaporation and separation of Crystals") which is inappropriate for an Academic Task 1 report. However, the core visual data is adequately addressed, aligning with the descriptors for Band 6.0.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response is organized chronologically, mirroring the steps in the diagram. Cohesive devices and sequence markers like "Firstly", "then", "The next phase", "On the fourth stage", and "In the last step" are used to guide the reader through the process. However, paragraphing is weak; the text consists of a series of short, choppy sentences rather than well-developed paragraphs, and the overall structure is somewhat mechanical. Referencing is generally clear, but the lack of sophisticated cohesive linking and poor paragraph control keep this criterion at Band 5.5.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

The student uses an adequate range of vocabulary relevant to the process, such as "manufacturing process", "harvesting", "crushed", "purify", "evaporation", "syrup", "centrifuge", and "crystals". However, there are noticeable word-form and spelling errors throughout the text, including "concerted" instead of converted, "limstone" instead of limestone, "seprated" instead of separated, and "Colling" instead of cooling. Less common lexical items are attempted but often marred by inaccuracies, and repetition of basic transition phrases limits the lexical score to a Band 5.0.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The student attempts a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, such as relative or subordinate clauses ("which started from the growth", "where juice concerted into syrup"). However, grammatical accuracy is low. There are frequent errors in tense consistency and verb forms, such as "ends with dying", "it used machines or by hands", "to crushed", "juice concerted", and capitalization errors like "Overall, The process". Punctuation is also erratic. These persistent errors cause some difficulty for the reader, fitting the Band 5.0 descriptors.

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.