Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 14 · 2026-08-15
IELTS Writing Task 1 question
The plans below show a public park when it first opened in 1920 and the same park today.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
Student answer (Band 5.5)
The blueprint illustrates a public park in the year of 1920 when it was opened and today. The park name is GRANGE park.
Overall, park have wide range of facilities rather than 1920 had. They made drastic changes in certain areas. They added some aspects which is increase the beauty of GRANGE PARK.
To begin with 1920's blueprint, both the entrances was at side of the park in addition to that they were near by ARNOLD AVENUE and ELDON STREET. Moreover, in the middle of the park they had a very tremendous fountain. Furthermore, for the setting area they had a seats at every side of the garden. Whereas also rose garden was looked nice at that time. Now turning to main things for instance: stage of musicians, glass house and pond for water plants were nicely placed at place.
Subsequently, they installed lots of items for particular things as well as they arrange structures in a proper way. Although, they installed things like: Cafe for visitors, Children's play area, Amphitheatre for concerts so people can enjoy. In addition to that main change they made is underground car park facilities which is useful of visitors.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5
The response covers the main features of the park in 1920 and today, identifying key additions like the cafe, amphitheatre, and car park. However, the analysis is somewhat superficial. The comparison between the two time periods lacks precision; for instance, the description of the fountain and rose garden is vague, and the spatial relationship of the new features is not clearly articulated. While the main features are selected, the report would benefit from a more structured comparison of what was removed versus what was added, rather than simply listing items. The overview is present but lacks a clear summary of the most significant transformation, such as the shift from a purely aesthetic garden to a facility-heavy public park.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5
The essay is organised into paragraphs, but the logical flow is often disjointed. While transition words like 'To begin with', 'Moreover', and 'Subsequently' are used, they are sometimes employed mechanically or inappropriately, such as 'Although' at the start of a sentence to introduce a list. The referencing is occasionally unclear, particularly when referring to 'items' or 'things' without specific context. The progression of ideas is somewhat repetitive, and the connection between the 1920 layout and the modern layout could be more fluidly integrated to highlight the changes more effectively.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The vocabulary is limited and often imprecise. Phrases like 'looked nice at that time', 'nicely placed at place', and 'lots of items for particular things' are informal and lack the academic tone required for Task 1. There is a reliance on basic descriptors, and some word choices are awkward or redundant. To reach a higher band, you should use more precise terminology related to maps and urban planning, such as 'replaced by', 'situated', 'converted into', or 'developed'. The range of vocabulary is sufficient to convey the basic meaning, but it lacks the flexibility and precision expected at higher levels.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0
There are frequent grammatical errors throughout the text that occasionally impede readability. Examples include subject-verb agreement issues ('park have', 'entrances was', 'seats at every side'), incorrect article usage, and awkward sentence construction ('which is increase the beauty', 'useful of visitors'). While there is an attempt to use complex structures, they are often faulty. The punctuation is also inconsistent, particularly with the use of colons and commas. A greater focus on basic sentence structure and subject-verb agreement is necessary before attempting more complex grammatical forms.
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.