Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 19 · 2026-10-20

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The plans below show a harbour in 2000 and how it looks today.

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

 

 

Student answer (Band 5.0)

The image shows difference of harbour in different times. There are two images, first one was taken in 2000s, and second one is taken today. We can clearly see the difference between the 2 decades of infrastructure. So, Lets discuss each infrastructure one by one.

Porth Harbour (in 2000s) looked like a perfect example of enjoyable life. It had Castle view of beach, Ferries, and sea sunset. Additionally, There were alot of fun options like passenger ferries, private yachts and fishing boats, where people would come and spend their quality times with their family and friends.

Now, Porth Harbour (today) has better infrastructure and alot of better options can be seen. Upgradation of parking, and Showers and toilets are done. Additionally, Now there are more boat docking options, with cafes and shops where people would spend time and eat food of their choices. In Short, you can say, now there are more consumer choices available in Porth Harbour.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

The response recognises that the harbour has changed and mentions several relevant features, including the ferries, yachts, fishing boats, parking, showers and toilets, and cafés and shops. However, it only partially reports the plans: much of the description is speculative commentary about “enjoyable life,” sunsets, and spending time with family, rather than a factual comparison. Important changes are missed or unclear, especially that the marina and fishing-boat areas have swapped locations, the castle has been replaced by a hotel, and the southern beach is now private. The claim of “more boat docking options” is not clearly explained. Focus on an overview of the main transformations, then accurately describe the key changes in location and use.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a basic, understandable structure: it introduces the two time periods, then gives one paragraph about 2000 and another about today. This helps the reader follow the broad contrast. However, the progression is not consistently organised around the map’s main features, and the phrase “Let’s discuss each infrastructure one by one” promises a feature-by-feature account that does not follow. Linking words such as “Additionally” and “In Short” are used, but they connect general comments rather than clearly sequenced comparisons. Group related changes—for example, boat areas, facilities, and the southern shoreline—and use explicit contrasts such as “whereas” or “by contrast” to make relationships between the two plans clearer.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

The response uses some relevant topic vocabulary, including “harbour,” “passenger ferries,” “private yachts,” “fishing boats,” and “cafes and shops,” so the subject is generally clear. However, the range is limited and several expressions are imprecise or informal for an academic map summary. “Enjoyable life,” “fun options,” and “consumer choices” introduce subjective ideas rather than describing the plan, while “upgradation of parking” is an awkward collocation. Repetition of “options” and “Additionally” also limits flexibility. Use precise terms for changes in location and function, such as “was relocated,” “was replaced by,” and “was converted into,” and choose neutral language that reports visible features rather than imagined visitor experiences.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response communicates its general meaning through mostly simple sentences and a few attempts at longer structures, such as “Additionally, there were a lot of fun options … where people would come…”. However, control is uneven, and errors occur in basic sentence patterns. “The image shows difference of harbour” is missing an article and uses an awkward singular construction; “first one was taken in 2000s” also needs clearer article and time phrasing. Tense shifts between “was taken,” “is taken,” and “has better infrastructure” are not consistently controlled. Capitalisation after commas is also inaccurate, as in “Additionally, There”. Practise accurate articles and past-versus-present forms, and build comparisons with controlled clauses such as “In 2000…, whereas today…”.

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.