Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 4.5 · Cambridge IELTS 19 · 2026-09-18

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 4.5)

The Graph shows the Comparision between People of Melborune and Australia taking part in differnet activities, over an 20 years period of time from 2000- 2020.

Overall there are differnet number of Activities given such as film club , martial status , ameteur dramtatics ,tabble tennis and musical perfomances which are following a trend and changed over the past years.

As we can that the number of participants for film club and people having martial status and have seen continous downfall and increase starting from 2000 to 2010,

o the other hand people had started taking more part in tabble tennis since 2005 since it increased rapidly and music perfomances likewise . people started taking less part in amateur drmatics and constany increased from 2010.

AI examiner evaluation

CriterionBand
Task Achievement / Task Response4.5
Coherence and Cohesion4.5
Lexical Resource4.0
Grammatical Range and Accuracy4.0
Overall4.5

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 4.5

The response fails to meet the minimum length requirement of 150 words, containing only 125 words, which negatively impacts the task achievement score. While the student attempts to summarise the main features of the chart, the content contains significant inaccuracies and misinterpretations of the data. For instance, the student refers to 'people having martial status' instead of martial arts, and incorrectly describes trends, such as stating that amateur dramatics 'constany increased from 2010' when the graph clearly shows a sharp decline. The overview is rudimentary and vague. Consequently, the response only partially addresses the task and lacks adequate data selection and support, aligning with a band 4.5 descriptor.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 4.5

The response is divided into very short, disjointed paragraphs that lack logical structure and overall progression. Cohesive devices are used awkwardly or inaccurately, such as the incomplete phrase 'As we can that' and the confusing transition 'o the other hand'. Referencing is frequently unclear, making it difficult to follow the relationships between ideas and data points. While there is a rudimentary attempt to group information, the mechanical and faulty use of cohesive ties, coupled with poor paragraphing, severely impedes the flow of the text, placing it firmly in the band 4.5 range.

Lexical Resource — Band 4.0

Vocabulary use is very basic and contains numerous lexical errors and spelling mistakes that impede communication. Examples include 'Comparision', 'Melborune', 'differnet', 'ameteur dramtatics' (for amateur dramatics), 'tabble tennis', and 'martial status' (for martial arts). The range of vocabulary is severely limited, and the student struggles with correct word formation and spelling throughout the response. There is little evidence of less common lexical items used accurately, restricting the score to a band 4.0.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 4.0

The response displays a very limited range of grammatical structures. The sentences attempted are often heavily flawed and grammatically incomplete, such as 'As we can that the number of participants for film club and people having martial status and have seen continous downfall and increase'. Punctuation is haphazard, with missing commas, run-on sentences, and awkward phrasings. Errors are extremely frequent and often distort the intended meaning, causing significant difficulty for the reader. This level of grammatical control corresponds to a band 4.0.

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.