Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Academic Practice Accelerator · 2026-10-28

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 illustrates the number of new visitors and returning visitors who visited Caryl Island from 2000 to 2008.

Overall, returning visitors had a significant increase and decrease across years. Whereas, first time visitors seen a sharp deline and then gradual increased.

In 2000, first time visitors was the highest with 8000 visitors, but returning visitors face the worst number of 3000 visitors. As the trend moves forward, returning individual recorded a rapid increase to 10000 but first time visitor decline to 4000. Until 2004, both visitors slightly increase. In 2004, returning got a massive up to 12000 whereas, first time visitor had only 6000 visitors. In 2006, returning visitors hit it is most peak point of 15000 while first time visitors continues to improve and reach 10000. In 2008, returning visitors delined to 13000 and first time visitors rose to 12000.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

You identify both visitor groups and report the broad pattern: returning visitors rise to a peak before falling, while first-time visitors dip and then recover. Several figures are close to the chart, including 8,000 and 3,000 in 2000 and the 2004 values. However, some details are inaccurate: first-time visitors are about 9,300 in 2006, not 10,000, and returning visitors peak at about 15,200, rather than 15,000 exactly. The overview is also vague and does not clearly compare the groups’ overall positions. The response is 131 words, below the required 150, so the report is underdeveloped; add a little more accurate comparison and detail without listing every value.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0

The response has a recognisable structure, with an opening, an overview and a chronological account, so the reader can follow the main time sequence. However, progression is limited because most details are presented as a series of year-by-year statements, with little grouping or comparison between the two lines. Some linking is awkward or inaccurate: “Whereas” begins a fragment after the overview, and “Until 2004” does not clearly connect the changes described. Repeated use of “In 2000,” “In 2004,” and “In 2006” also makes the account feel mechanical. Grouping the early changes together and then comparing the later trends would create clearer progression and more effective cohesion.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use relevant vocabulary for describing a graph, including “increase,” “decline,” “rapid increase,” and “peak point,” and the reader can generally understand the trends you intend to describe. However, the range is limited and some choices or collocations are noticeably inaccurate, such as “face the worst number,” “returning individual,” and “got a massive up.” Spelling errors in “deline” and “delined” also reduce accuracy. Aim for precise, conventional graph language and avoid dramatic or conversational expressions. For example, describe a figure as reaching a peak or falling, and use “visitors” consistently rather than switching to “individual.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt some sentence variety, including a contrast with “Whereas” and a time clause beginning “As the trend moves forward.” However, the range is limited, and errors occur frequently enough to make several sentences awkward. Examples include “first time visitors was,” where subject–verb agreement is incorrect, and “first time visitors seen,” which has an incorrect verb form. “Whereas” is used as a sentence fragment, while “returning visitors hit it is most peak point” has faulty sentence construction and pronoun use. Work on accurate past-tense reporting, plural agreement, and complete sentence structures. Shorter, carefully checked sentences would improve clarity before you attempt more complex comparisons.

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.