Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 4.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-03

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)

This graph show that the emission of Corban dioxide per person in the United Kingdom, Sweden, Itlay, and Portugal between 1967 and 2007. If we take reading in metric tonnes at the distance of two. If we see the ratio of United Kingdom. The ratio of emission of corban dioxde in 1967, the rate is 11 metric tonnes and its genrally decreases from 11 to 8 in 2007. The ratio of Sweden people in 1967, the ratio at the 9 metric tonnes it increases rapidly in 1977 and goes to 10.1. And suddenly the ratio is decrease in 1987 from 10.1 to 7. And after that the ratio decreases slowly in 1987 to 2007 from 7 to 5.5. If we notice the reading of Italy that start from 4.1 in 1967, and after increasing in 1977, the ratio approch to 6.1. And after that time of period there is small change from 1977 to 1987 can be notice, the ratio changes from 6.1 to 7. And after 1987 there also littel change can be noticed from 1987 to 1997 the changing from 7 to 7.5. And there is no change can be observed from 1997 to 2007.If we see the ratio of Portugal, there is no changing in first 20 years from 1967 to 1987 they are continuos grwoing with the same rate. In 1987 the ratio is at the 3. And suddenly the changing is noticed from 1987 to 1997, the ratio grows from 3 to 5. And after that the reading is slowly grow up from 1997 to 2007, the ratio changes from 5 to 5.5.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

The response attempts to describe the main trends shown in the line graph regarding carbon dioxide emissions across four countries, but the coverage is only partial. There is no clear overview provided at the beginning or end of the text, which is an essential feature of a successful academic report. Furthermore, many of the figures and trends reported are inaccurate or insufficiently developed. For instance, the student states that the United Kingdom emission rate in 1967 is 11 metric tonnes and decreases to 8, whereas the data shows 10.8 decreasing to 8.7. Similarly, descriptions of the other countries rely heavily on repetitive, mechanical listings of individual data points without drawing meaningful comparisons between the nations. To improve and reach a higher level, the response needs to select and highlight key overall trends and make direct comparisons across the countries rather than detailing every minor fluctuation.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.5

The response shows some basic organization, attempting to address each country in turn, but there is no clear overall progression or logical structure guiding the reader through the data. Paragraphing is entirely absent, as the entire 268-word response is written as a single, dense block of text, which significantly hinders readability. Cohesive devices are extremely limited and repetitive, with phrases like 'If we see the ratio of' and 'And after that' overused to link sentences. Referential cohesion is also faulty, as pronouns and referencing terms are often unclear. To achieve a higher score, the writer must divide the text into logical paragraphs, introduce a clear introductory overview, and use a wider variety of cohesive devices naturally to connect ideas without relying on mechanical repetition.

Lexical Resource: Band 4.5

The vocabulary used is limited and repetitive, with basic terms like 'ratio', 'change', and 'grow' recurring constantly throughout the text. There are also several spelling and word-choice errors that detract from the quality, such as 'Corban' instead of carbon, 'Itlay' instead of Italy, and 'approch' instead of approach. The student frequently misuses the word 'ratio' to describe absolute values or levels of emissions. While the vocabulary is adequate to convey a basic meaning, the lack of a varied lexical range and frequent spelling mistakes prevent the response from reaching a higher band. To improve, the writer should build a broader vocabulary related to data trends, such as verbs and adverbs indicating change, and carefully check spelling and word forms.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response demonstrates a limited range of sentence structures, relying primarily on simple clauses and heavily flawed attempts at complex sentences. There are frequent grammatical errors throughout the text, including subject-verb agreement issues ('This graph show', 'the ratio is decrease'), incorrect verb tenses, and missing auxiliary verbs. For example, the opening sentence lacks a main verb after 'show that', writing 'This graph show that the emission... between 1967 and 2007' instead of a complete clause. Punctuation is also problematic, with run-on sentences and sentence fragments used inappropriately. To move to a higher band, the student needs to produce a greater variety of error-free complex sentence structures and exercise better control over basic grammar, tense consistency, and punctuation.

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.