Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 13 · 2026-09-18

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The two maps below show road access to a city hospital in 2007 and 2010.

Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons wherever relevant.

Student answer (Band 5.5)

The diagram shows the structural improvements made over time on the city hospital. It is evident that over the course of three years the building and surrounding area went under considerable changes. In the 2007 version many facilities are lacking, such as separate parking area for public and staff cars. The lack of designated parking areas may cause congestion and difficulty finding parking spots. Whereas, a separate public car parking and staff car parking offers great relief to both the workers and the general public. Furthermore, an improvement made in the 2010 version is the provision of a bus station near the hospital road. This greatly benefits all commuters that utilise public transport since many people are unable to bring their own vehicles to the hospital. Subsequently, the provison of a bus station also reduces the load and competition for parking spots in parking areas since fewer cars will be brought to the hospital. Conclusively, it will not be wrong to say that the 2010 version offers greater ease of use, access and overall utilises the available area more efficiently.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0

The student attempts to summarise the maps by describing changes such as the introduction of a bus station, roundabouts, and separate car parks. However, the response falls short of fully satisfying Task Achievement requirements. A key weakness is that the student speculates on the causes and consequences of these changes (e.g., stating that the lack of parking in 2007 'may cause congestion' and that the bus station 'reduces the load and competition'), which is inappropriate for an Academic Task 1 summary. Task 1 requires an objective reporting of visual data rather than subjective commentary or editorialising. Furthermore, the overall layout changes are not comprehensively covered, missing details like the relocation of the public car park to the east of Ring Road. This leads to an underdeveloped overview and places the response in Band 5.0.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0

The response is presented as a single dense paragraph following a brief opening sentence, which means paragraphing is not used sufficiently or appropriately to structure the information logically. While cohesive devices such as 'Whereas', 'Furthermore', and 'Subsequently' are employed, their mechanical use sometimes struggles to link disparate speculative points rather than effectively sequencing spatial data. There is a basic progression from 2007 to 2010, but the overall arrangement lacks the clear logical structure and paragraph organisation expected for higher bands. Referencing is occasionally unclear, such as the pronoun 'it' in the concluding sentence referring vaguely to the 2010 version. Overall, coherence and cohesion align best with Band 5.0 descriptors.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

The student uses an adequate vocabulary for the task, successfully incorporating terms like 'structural improvements', 'designated', 'utilise', and 'efficiently'. However, there are notable lexical errors and awkward word choices, such as 'went under considerable changes' (instead of 'underwent'), 'separate public car parking' (instead of 'car park'), and 'provison' (a spelling error). The vocabulary is sometimes repetitive, and the attempt to use less common items is occasionally marred by minor inaccuracies in collocation. Because the range is minimally adequate but features noticeable errors in word choice and spelling, a score of 5.5 is appropriate.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

The student demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, attempting structures with subordinate clauses like 'since many people are unable to bring their own vehicles'. However, grammatical control is inconsistent. There are errors in verb tense consistency and prepositions, such as 'went under considerable changes' (underwent) and 'near the hospital road' (capitalisation/article issues). Punctuation is generally acceptable, and communication is rarely impeded, but errors persist throughout the text. The majority of sentences are not error-free, preventing the response from reaching Band 6.0 fully, though it meets the criteria well at Band 5.5 due to a reasonable mix of structures.

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.