Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-10

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 5.0)

The graph shows average CO2 emissions per person in the foure states between 1967 to 2007.

Overall Portugal and Italy is average carbon dioxied emissions per person to increase and Sweden are here fluctuation.However,United Kingdom are dramatically dicrease.The highest value is UK and lowest is Portugal to around 1 to 11 % metric ton gap in this to country

In Contrast Portugal1967 around 1 metric tonnes to around 5 metric tonnes are highly increase in 1997 and 2007 here are same value to increase the CO2.IN 1967 Italy around 4.5 metric tonnes co2 increase in 1977 aftere there most increase in 1997 in 1.5% metric tonnes.After 1997 to 2007 there are like similerly increase by Co2 emission

Moreover Sweden are verity of fluctuation in 1967 to 1977 arround 2.2% increase and 1977 to 2007 here dramatically dicrease by every 10 years.However,United Kingdom IN 1967 The most 11 metric tonnes co2,and we see that here slightly dicrease in 1967 to 2007 in 4% .

in conclution we ca see here there are two country are increase and also two country are sligtlhy dicrease in co2 emission in per person.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify the broad pattern that Italy and Portugal rose, while the UK declined, and you note that the UK began highest and Portugal lowest. These are relevant features. However, the overview is partly inaccurate: Sweden also declined overall, despite rising to a peak in 1977, so describing it simply as fluctuating misses its overall direction. Some details are unclear or incorrect, such as saying Italy continued to increase from 1997 to 2007, when it remained roughly level, and describing the UK’s fall as “4%” rather than about four metric tonnes. To strengthen the report, give a clear overview of all four trends and compare key turning points and end values accurately.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has an opening, an attempted overview, and separate discussion of the countries, so there is some organisation. However, the progression is difficult to follow because comparisons and details are mixed together, and the final conclusion repeats the overview without adding clarity. Linking expressions such as “However,” and “Moreover” are used, but sometimes do not show a clear relationship between the ideas that follow. The country descriptions would be easier to understand if grouped into a logical sequence—for example, the two declining series followed by the two rising series—and if each paragraph focused on a clear comparison. Clearer sentence boundaries and more precise references would also help readers track which country and period each statement concerns.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some relevant topic vocabulary, including “emissions,” “metric tonnes,” “increase,” “decrease,” and “fluctuation,” which helps convey the subject. However, the range is limited and several word choices or collocations make the meaning difficult to interpret, as in “Portugal and Italy is average carbon dioxied emissions” and “there are like similerly increase.” Spelling errors such as “dicrease,” “conclution,” and “foure” are also noticeable. Use standard trend language consistently, and distinguish a rise or fall in emissions from a percentage change. More precise terms such as “peaked,” “remained stable,” and “declined steadily” would make the comparisons clearer and more appropriate for an academic report.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

The response attempts both simple statements and longer sentences, but control is limited and errors frequently make relationships between ideas hard to understand. Examples include subject–verb agreement in “Portugal and Italy is” and “Sweden are,” and incorrect verb patterns in “emissions … to increase” and “here dramatically dicrease.” Tense and sentence construction are also inconsistent, particularly in “Portugal1967 around 1 metric tonnes to around 5 metric tonnes are highly increase.” Punctuation and capitalisation are unreliable, with missing spaces after full stops and unexpected capitals such as “IN.” Practise building accurate comparison sentences with a clear subject, verb, and time reference before adding more complex clauses.

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.