Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 19 · 2026-09-02
IELTS Writing Task 1 question
The graph below gives information on the numbers of participants for different activities at one social centre in Melbourne, Australia for the period 2000 to 2020.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
Student answer (Band 5.5)
the presented line graph describe the number of contestants for various games at a social centre in melbourne, Australia between 2000 and 2020.
overall the firm club has maximum number of participant over the whole period and musical performances got minimum number of members while other games had fluctuating numbers of participants over the years.
From 2000 to 2005 70 percent of people took part in firm club and about 40 percent of participants involved in martial arts and number of contributors in amateur dramatics were 25 percent but on the other hand the number of contestants in table tennis remain below 20% and there is no one participating in musical performace.
in 2010 the number of people in firm club plumet upto 60% and also significant decline in the members of ameteur dramatics meanwhile the count of people participating in martial arts and musical performances surge substantially but this count remain stable for martial arts.
By 2020, there was dramatic increase in participants in table tennis with upto 55% and also rise in musical performance with upto 20 percent. During the period number of competitors remain stable in firm club and in martial arts although huge drop was occur in amateur dramatics.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.5 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.5 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5
The response covers the main features of the graph, including the trends for the various activities. However, there are significant issues with data accuracy and interpretation. For instance, the student mentions '70 percent' and '40 percent' for activities, whereas the graph units are likely in absolute numbers of participants, not percentages. Furthermore, the claim that 'there is no one participating in musical performance' in 2000 is a misreading of the graph. While the overview is present, the lack of precision in reporting the data points and the confusion regarding the units of measurement prevent a higher score. The summary is functional but lacks the analytical depth required for a higher band.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5
The essay is organised into paragraphs, which helps the reader follow the structure. However, the use of cohesive devices is somewhat mechanical and occasionally inaccurate. Phrases like 'on the other hand' are used where they do not logically contrast the preceding information. Additionally, the progression of ideas between sentences is sometimes disjointed. While the paragraphing is clear, the internal flow of the text needs more variety and better control over linking words to achieve a more natural and logical progression of information.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.5
The range of vocabulary is adequate for the task but lacks precision and sophistication. There are several spelling errors, such as 'plumet' (plummet), 'ameteur' (amateur), and 'performace' (performance). The word choice is often repetitive, such as the frequent use of 'number of' and 'participants'. While the student attempts to use some descriptive verbs like 'surge' and 'decline', the overall lexical control is limited. To improve, the student should focus on using a wider variety of synonyms and ensuring correct spelling of key terms related to data description.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5
The response contains a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, but there are frequent grammatical errors that occasionally impede clarity. Issues include subject-verb agreement (e.g., 'the presented line graph describe'), missing articles, and awkward phrasing (e.g., 'huge drop was occur'). Punctuation is also inconsistent, with missing commas and incorrect capitalisation of proper nouns like 'Melbourne'. While the meaning is generally understandable, the high frequency of errors in basic grammar and sentence construction limits the score. More attention to proofreading and basic sentence structure is necessary.
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.