Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 4.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-08

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 line chart illustrate the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person in the United Kingdom, Sweden, Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007.

Overall trent emissions was downfall and some has rise at the end the reamain same.

Initially ,In 1967 almost 1 percenatge emissions of carbon dioxide in Portugal on the other side In Sweden 8 percentage emissions of carbon dioxide in 1967. Howerver, In 1967 there are 4 percentage for each person emissions of carbon dioxide in italy .On the other side almost 11 percentage for each person emissions of carbon dioxide in united kingdom in 1967

Following to this In 1977 and 1987 In united kindom the value of emissions of carbon dioxide was showed Downfall It went to 10 percentage . Howerver, In portugal the emissions of carbon dioxide value was rise It went upto 2 persentage in 1977 and in 1987 It showed upto 3 percentage.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.0

You identify the topic and mention several starting figures, including the UK at about 11 and Portugal at about 1, and you note that UK emissions fell while Portugal’s rose. However, the overview is unclear and does not accurately summarise the main pattern: the UK and Sweden declined overall, Italy and Portugal increased, and Italy levelled off near the end. The response also stops after discussing only the UK and Portugal, leaving the later trends and important comparisons for Sweden and Italy largely unreported. Some figures are described as “percentage” rather than metric tonnes. The response is 136 words, below the required 150 words, which limits the coverage of the task. Add a clear overview and report the main changes across all four countries.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.5

There is a basic attempt to organise the response, beginning with an introduction and an overview before moving to details. The chronological references to 1967, 1977 and 1987 also give the reader some sense of sequence. However, the overview is difficult to interpret, and the body paragraph is a long, crowded sequence of statements rather than a clearly grouped comparison. Connectors such as “On the other side” are repeated and do not always express the relationship between the figures accurately. The response ends abruptly without covering the later years. Use separate paragraphs for the overview and key details, group countries with similar trends, and use linking phrases such as “whereas” and “by contrast” to make comparisons clearer.

Lexical Resource: Band 4.5

The response uses some relevant topic vocabulary, including “emissions,” “per person,” “rise” and “downfall,” so the subject is generally recognisable. However, the range is basic and repetitive, and several word choices or forms are inaccurate: “percentage” is not the unit shown, “downfall” is unsuitable for describing a line graph, and “the reamain same” is unclear. Spelling errors such as “trent,” “Howerver,” “persentage” and “united kindom” also reduce clarity. Aim for precise graph language and check spelling and word forms. For example, describe values in “metric tonnes,” and use “declined,” “increased” or “remained stable” to report trends.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

You attempt both an opening sentence and longer sentences with time references, but grammatical control is inconsistent and the sentence patterns are mostly simple or awkwardly joined. For example, “The line chart illustrate” has a subject–verb agreement error, while “Overall trent emissions was downfall” lacks a clear grammatical structure. In “In 1977 and 1987 In united kindom the value … was showed,” the word order and passive verb form make the meaning difficult to follow. Capitalisation and punctuation are also inconsistent, with unnecessary capitals after commas and missing sentence boundaries. Practise accurate simple comparisons first, then add controlled clauses using “while” or “whereas”; check agreement, articles and verb forms when editing.

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.