Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Academic Practice Accelerator · 2026-10-04

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 5.0)

The line graph illustrats the value of first time visitors and returning tourists who explored Caryl between 2000 to 2008.

Overall, According to the line graph there was two different categories in the graph. the first name were first time visitors and this visistors colour was blue. In addition, the second tourists name was Returning visitors this shown was red colour.

Firstly, As based on the line graph, first time visitors value was 8000 in 2000 year. than seddenly, first time toursts was slowly decline 8000 to 4000 in 2002. that was very biggest difference in the graph. however, the first time visitors generally increase in many years. such as, in year 2004 visitors ratio was 6000 while, in 2006 repidly grew value of the visistors.

On the other hand, in 2000 year, returning visitors was ratio 3000 as well as after two years returning visitors ratio direct rose 10000. tht was very greatest changed. than in 2006 flow of the returning visitors grewup 15000. that was biggest jump therefore, after sometime in 2008, ratio minimum decrease above 13000.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

The response attempts to summarise the line graph showing the number of first time and returning visitors to Caryl Island, but it only addresses the task partially. While some main features are mentioned, such as the initial numbers and certain changes like the drop in 2002, the overview is missing or confused by stating 'there was two different categories in the graph'. Furthermore, the description of trends lacks clarity, and some data points are misread or awkwardly expressed, such as stating returning visitors reached 15000 in 2006 when the gridline shows around 15200, or describing data using non-standard phrasing like 'visitors ratio was 6000'. To reach a higher level, the writer needs to present a clear overview of the main trends at the beginning and ensure all key data points are reported accurately without irrelevant commentary on colours or categories.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response shows some organization with paragraphs attempting to separate the introduction, overall summary, and body paragraphs for each visitor type. However, there is no clear overall progression due to repetitive phrasing and weak structural links. Cohesive devices are used awkwardly or inaccurately, such as starting sentences with 'than seddenly,' 'that was very biggest difference,' and 'tht was very greatest changed.' Paragraphing is attempted, but the internal logical flow is hindered by abrupt shifts and fragmented descriptions. To improve, the student should use standard transition signals like 'In contrast,' 'Subsequently,' or 'Overall,' and ensure that each sentence logically follows the previous one to create a smoother, more cohesive narrative.

Lexical Resource: Band 4.5

The vocabulary used is limited and repetitive, relying heavily on basic terms like 'value', 'visitors', 'tourists', and 'ratio'. There are noticeable lexical errors and awkward word choices throughout the text, such as 'illustrats' (illustrates), 'first name' instead of category name, 'visistors colour', 'seddenly' (suddenly), 'repidly' (rapidly), and 'grewup'. These errors occasionally cause strain for the reader. To achieve a higher score, the writer needs to incorporate a wider and more precise range of vocabulary related to data trends, such as 'fluctuate', 'surge', 'plummet', or 'gradual increase', and pay closer attention to standard spelling and word forms.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

The response displays a very limited range of grammatical structures, relying primarily on simple sentences with frequent errors in basic grammar, tense usage, and prepositions. Examples of errors include subject-verb agreement issues like 'there was two different categories', incorrect prepositions such as 'in 2000 year' instead of 'in 2000', and faulty tense application like 'first time toursts was slowly decline'. Attempts at complex sentences are generally absent or structurally flawed, and punctuation is inconsistent. To improve, the writer must focus on mastering basic sentence construction, ensuring correct verb tenses for past data, and eliminating frequent errors that impede overall readability.

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.