Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-11

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 5.5)

The graph shows the average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person in the United Kingdom, Sweden, Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007. Graphs illustrates that there is increase in emission in Portugal and Italy while decrease in United Kingdom and Sweden.

Portugal had least carbon emission which was around 1 in 1967 and it increased steady upto 1997 where emission reached around 5 and afterward it remained constant. Itlay also shows similar pattern like Portugal as it started from just above 4 and ended at just below 8 in 1997 and emision in the last decade remained constant.

Sweden emission average is different from rest of the countries and it started just above 8 and it increased stready upto 1977 where it crossed 10 average and after that receding average was shown for next decade where it came below 7. It continued to reduce with linear decline and reached the same level of Portugal in 2007. United Kingdom had average of around 11 that was highest carbon dioxide emission in 1967 and it decreased steadily ending up just above 8 in 2007. It had still the highest carbon dioxide emission in 2007.

Carbon emission increased in Portugal and Italy while Sweden and United Kingdom showed decline. United Kingdom had the highest contribution while in contrast Portugal had the least throughout the time.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You identify the main overall contrast: emissions rose in Portugal and Italy, while they fell in the UK and Sweden. You also report several key comparisons accurately, including the UK remaining highest in 2007 and Portugal starting lowest. This gives the response a clear overview and relevant coverage of the four countries. Some details, however, are less fully or precisely reported: Italy reached about 7.6 by 1997 and then stayed level, rather than merely ending “just below 8 in 1997”; Portugal’s final figure was about 5.4, so it did not remain exactly level with its 1997 value. The overview also repeats the trend summary rather than highlighting the notable Swedish peak in 1977 and subsequent sharp fall. More precise comparisons would strengthen the report.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, country-focused paragraphs and a concluding summary. Grouping Portugal with Italy and then discussing Sweden and the UK helps readers follow the main trends. However, progression is weakened by repeating the same overview in both the opening and final sentences, and some links are mechanical, such as “while” and “after that.” The long Sweden sentence combines several stages without clear punctuation, making the sequence harder to track. References such as “the same level of Portugal” are also not fully clear, since the figures are only approximately equal in 2007. Use more purposeful paragraphing and transitions, and organise comparisons around shared patterns or turning points rather than restating the overview.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant task vocabulary, including “emissions,” “increased,” “decreased steadily,” “receding” and “linear decline,” and the main meaning is generally understandable. However, the range is limited by repeated use of “average,” “emission” and “increased,” while several word choices or collocations are unnatural: “carbon emission,” “shows similar pattern like,” and “highest contribution” do not describe the graph as precisely as “per-person emissions,” “followed a similar pattern” and “highest level.” Spelling errors such as “Itlay,” “emision” and “stready” are noticeable and reduce accuracy. Aim for precise, varied trend language and check spelling carefully; this would make the report more fluent and exact.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more extended sentence forms, and the reader can generally understand the comparisons. Some sentences are controlled, such as “It had still the highest carbon dioxide emission in 2007,” but errors recur in articles, agreement and sentence construction. For example, “Graphs illustrates that there is increase” has agreement and article problems, while “Portugal had least carbon emission” also needs an article. The sentence beginning “Sweden emission average is different…” is awkwardly structured, and the long sequence about its rise and decline would benefit from clearer clause boundaries. There is some variety, but complex sentences are not consistently accurate. Practise article use and subject–verb agreement, and divide multi-stage descriptions into shorter, well-punctuated sentences.

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.