Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Academic Practice Accelerator · 2026-09-21
IELTS Writing Task 1 question
The line graph shows the number of first time visitors and returning visitors who visited Caryl Island from 2000 to 2008.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The line graph shows the number of first time visitors and returning visitors who visited Caryl Island from 2000 to 2008.
Student answer (Band 5.5)
The line graph depicts the number of first-time visitors and returning visitors who visited Caryl Island from 2000 to 2008.
Overall, what stands out from the graph is that the number of first-time visitors was 8,000 in 2000; this figure dropped slightly before rising again by 2008. Another interesting point is that the number of returning visitors started at nearly 3,000 in 2000 and experienced a significant increase to 12,000.
In 2000, the number of first-time visitors was 8,000, but in 2002 it dropped to 4,000. A sharp increase was then seen from 2004 to 2008, with almost 12,000 visitors coming for the very first time.
Regarding returning visitors, at the start there was a decline in 2000 to almost under 4,000 ~~visitiors~~ visitors; the figure increased in 2002 by 10,000 visitors. It then surged rapidly by 2006, reaching approximately 15,000 visitors, before declining a bit to 13,000 in 20
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.5 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.5 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0
The student attempts to cover the main trends in the line graph, providing an overview in the second paragraph and detailing data for both first-time and returning visitors. However, the response suffers from significant data omissions and inaccuracies. For instance, the overview prematurely cites specific data points rather than general trends. Additionally, the description of returning visitors contains factual errors, such as claiming the number started with a decline to 'under 4,000' in 2000 (when it was actually 3,000) and misinterpreting the 2002 figure as an increase 'by 10,000' rather than 'to 10,000'. Most critically, the response is incomplete, cutting off abruptly at the end with 'in 20'. Because key features are partially obscured by inaccuracies and the text is unfinished, the task is only partially addressed.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5
The response shows an attempt to structure the information logically, utilizing paragraph breaks to separate the introduction, overview, and body details. However, the overall progression is disrupted by the incomplete ending and occasional awkward grouping of data. Cohesive devices are used, such as 'Overall', 'In 2000', and 'Regarding returning visitors', but referencing and transitions between sentences can feel slightly mechanical or repetitive. Paragraphing is attempted appropriately, but the abrupt cutoff at the conclusion severely impacts the overall coherence and logical flow of the piece.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.5
The student demonstrates an adequate vocabulary range to discuss numerical trends, employing terms such as 'depicts', 'dropped slightly', 'significant increase', and 'surged rapidly'. There are several attempts to use less common vocabulary. However, there are notable word choice and phrasing inaccuracies, such as stating that the figure 'increased in 2002 by 10,000 visitors' (when it reached 10,000). Furthermore, there is a crossing-out correction ('visitiors visitors') and the vocabulary is somewhat repetitive when describing upward and downward movements. The range is sufficient for the task but lacks precision.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5
The writer attempts a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, using temporal clauses and coordinating conjunctions effectively in places, such as 'while returning visitors experienced a significant increase'. Grammatical control is generally decent in the opening sentences, but errors appear in tense consistency, prepositions, and structural completeness. The most glaring issue is the incomplete final sentence ('...in 20'), which leaves a structure hanging. Other minor punctuation and prepositional slips occur, but simple sentences are generally accurate and rarely impede basic communication.
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.