Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · IELTS Academic Practice Accelerator · 2026-10-11

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 6.0)

The line graph compare between the number of new visitors and returning visitors who visited Caryl Island from 2000 to 2008.

Overall, Returning visitors where more consistent through out the period, but dropped by the end of the period. Whereas the first time visitors fluctuated at the start, but rose again and grew consistently through out the period.

According to what is shown, Returning visitors started at the bottom, with a number between two to four thousand. by 2002 they rose exponentially, and reached ten thousand visitor. They continued with that behavior, and by 2006 they reached their peak, which is around fifteen thousands. By 2008 they had a minor drop, and reached just under fourteen thousand.

Whereas, first time visitors had a great start with eight thousand visitors. By 2002 they had lost half of their visitors, and reached four thousand. Then they started growing gradually, and by 2006 they reached just under ten thousand. They continued with the same behavior, and by 2008 they reached just under twelve thousand.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

You cover the main features and provide a clear overview: returning visitors rose to a peak in 2006 before falling, while first-time visitors declined initially and then increased. The figures are generally accurate, including the starting values and the approximate 2008 totals. The description also makes relevant comparisons between the two series. However, “Returning visitors were more consistent throughout the period” is not well supported: this series changed sharply from about 3,000 to 10,000 and then continued rising, whereas the first-time series also fluctuated. Replace this with a more precise overview of the contrasting trends. To strengthen the response further, compare the series directly at key points, such as noting that returning visitors overtook first-time visitors by 2002 and remained higher thereafter.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, an overview and separate paragraphs describing each visitor group. This makes the information easy to locate. However, progression within the body is somewhat mechanical: both paragraphs repeat a year-by-year sequence, and transitions rely heavily on “Whereas” and “Then.” The opening “According to what is shown” does not add a clear link, while “Whereas” begins a paragraph without completing a contrastive sentence. Improve cohesion by grouping the trends around the main changes and comparisons, and use linking expressions more accurately. For example, after describing the returning visitors’ peak and decline, connect this directly to the first-time visitors’ continued rise in 2008.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of vocabulary for describing trends, including “reached their peak,” “dropped,” “grew consistently” and “lost half.” These choices communicate the main movements, and the reader can understand the figures. Some wording is imprecise or does not collocate naturally, however. “More consistent” mischaracterises the substantial changes in returning visitors, and “great start” is informal and unclear in this context. “Rose exponentially” is also too strong for the increase shown and suggests a specific mathematical pattern that the graph does not establish. Aim for precise, neutral trend language and avoid overstating changes. More accurate choices such as “rose sharply” or “increased steadily” would make the description more suitable for an academic report.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex sentences, including contrastive structures with “Whereas” and time clauses such as “By 2002 they rose…” The overall meaning remains clear, but some grammatical errors recur. The opening should be “The line graph compares,” not “compare between”; “visitors were” is needed instead of “visitors where”; and “throughout” is one word. There are also sentence-boundary and capitalisation problems, as in “two to four thousand. by 2002,” and number phrases need more accurate forms, such as “ten thousand visitors” and “fifteen thousand.” Review subject–verb agreement, sentence openings and plural forms, then proofread punctuation. More consistently accurate control of these patterns would improve clarity.

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.