Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 4.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-09-12
IELTS Writing Task 1 question
The graph below shows average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person in the United Kingdom, Sweden, Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
Student answer (Band 4.5)
The given bar chat elucidates information about the graph shows average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person in the United Kingdom Sweden Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007
Summaries the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
Overall it is clear that there are noticiable difference among the categories
Overall CO2 emissions per person decreased in the both UK and Sweden While they rose in Italy and Portugal In 1967 the UK and Sweden had the highest emissinons at around 11 and 9 metric tonnes per person respectively both countries then experienced a decline UK emissions fell steadily to approximately 9 tonnes in 2007 thus while northern countries reduced emissions southern Europen countries increased them leading to more similar levels by the end of the period while UK and Sweden was decreased ITaly and Portugal was INcreasad Highest in 1967 Sweden and UK Lowest in 1967 Portugal Gap narrowed by 2007
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 4.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 4.0 |
| Overall | 4.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0
The response attempts to summarize the provided graph by identifying main trends, noting that CO2 emissions decreased in the UK and Sweden while increasing in Italy and Portugal. The writer also includes some key data points, such as the initial 1967 figures for the UK and Sweden and the narrowing gap by 2007. However, the task achievement is hindered by copying parts of the rubric directly and including disjointed bullet-point-like fragments at the end of the text. Furthermore, the development of comparisons is somewhat repetitive and lacks complete integration across all data categories. Consequently, the response meets the minimum length requirement but only partially fulfills the core descriptive demands of Task 1, aligning with a band 5.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 4.5
The text demonstrates some organizational attempts with transitional phrases like 'Overall' and 'In 1967'. However, the overall progression is severely disrupted by poor formatting, including copied prompt instructions inserted directly into the body and a disjointed string of fragments at the conclusion ('Highest in 1967 Sweden and UK...'). Cohesive devices are minimal, and referencing is faulty, leading to run-on sentences and a lack of clear paragraphing. While the reader can discern the basic grouping of information regarding northern and southern European countries, the structural flaws prevent the response from achieving higher coherence.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The vocabulary used is generally basic and repetitive, with several spelling errors ('chat' instead of chart, 'noticiable', 'emissinons', 'Europen', 'INcreasad'). The writer manages to use some topic-appropriate terms such as 'emissions', 'metric tonnes per person', and 'decline'. However, the lack of a varied lexical range and frequent mechanical vocabulary mistakes restrict the score. The incorporation of words directly from the task prompt further limits lexical demonstration. Despite these inaccuracies, the vocabulary is minimally adequate to convey the core meaning of the carbon dioxide emission trends.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 4.0
The text relies heavily on simple sentence structures and run-on compound sentences, such as 'thus while northern countries reduced emissions southern Europen countries increased them leading to more similar levels by the end of the period while UK and Sweden was decreased ITaly and Portugal was INcreased'. Punctuation is largely neglected throughout the response, with missing periods and commas creating massive run-on clauses. Grammatical errors are frequent, particularly with passive voice constructions ('was decreased') and tense consistency. These issues cause noticeable difficulty for the reader and place the performance firmly within the band 4 range.
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.