Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-19

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 6.0)

The line graph below presents average carbon dioxide(CO2) emissions per person in 4 different countries: United Kingdom, Sweden, Italy and Portugal, between 1967 and 2007.

Overall, United Kingdom and Sweden have experienced a noticeable decrease in the emissions of CO2 in metric tonnes throughout the years, while it increased in both Italy and portugal in the same period.

In 1967, United kingdom was the highest country to emit CO2 with almost 11 metric tonnes by person, followed by Sweden, making about 8 that year, and then there's Italy with 4, and finally, Portugal, which reached less than 2.

In 1977, CO2 emissions has increased in all these countries except the United Kingdom, with barely 11, while in Sweden it reached about 10, and 6 in Italy. Portugal is still the lowest country with CO2 emissions.

In 1987, Portugal and Italy emissions continued to rise with almost 3 and 7, consecutively. However, both Sweden and United Kingdom emissions decreased with 7 and 10.

In 1997, no major changes were recorded: United Kingdom emissions were at almost 9.5, Swedens were at 6, Italys were at almsot 7.5 and finally Portugals were at about 5.5.

In 2007, United kingdom still had the highest record even with decreasing to almost 7, while Sweden had a noticeable decrease, with almost 5.5, meeting with Portugal on the same average, Italy experienced a stablity in these records since 1997.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You identify the overall contrast accurately: emissions fell in the UK and Sweden, while they rose in Italy and Portugal. The chronological account also includes the main countries and several useful comparisons, such as Sweden and Portugal reaching similar levels by 2007. However, some key details are inaccurate or unclear. The UK was about 8.7 tonnes in 2007, not “almost 7,” and Italy was already stable at about 7.6 from 1997 to 2007, rather than simply “stability in these records since 1997” without a clear figure. The overview could also highlight that the UK remained highest throughout and that Italy overtook Sweden. The response covers the task, but some features are less fully and precisely reported than others.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction, an overview, and paragraphs that follow the graph chronologically. This makes the sequence of years easy to follow, and linking expressions such as “However” and “while” help signal contrasts. The organisation is generally coherent, but the year-by-year approach sometimes reads like a list of separate observations rather than a comparison of the most important trends. Some references are also unclear, for example “meeting with Portugal on the same average,” and “no major changes” in 1997 is not well supported because the countries’ figures differ substantially. To strengthen progression, group related trends together and use clearer references, while keeping the overview distinct from the detailed comparisons.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of vocabulary for describing a line graph, including “decrease,” “increased,” “reached,” “recorded,” and “stability.” These choices communicate the broad trends, and terms such as “metric tonnes” are appropriate to the data. Some word choices and collocations are imprecise, however: “highest country to emit” is less natural than describing the country as having the highest emissions, and “meeting with Portugal on the same average” is awkward. There are also spelling and form slips, including “stablity,” “almsot,” and inconsistent capitalisation of “Portugal” and “United Kingdom.” More precise trend language and careful proofreading would make the report sound more controlled and natural.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex sentences, including contrast clauses with “while” and “although,” and most of the meaning remains understandable. Some grammatical errors persist, particularly with tense, agreement, and sentence construction. For example, “CO2 emissions has increased” should use a plural verb, and “while it increased in both Italy and portugal” has an unclear pronoun reference. The phrase “even with decreasing to almost 7” is also not grammatically well formed; a construction such as “despite falling to…” would be clearer. There are some errors in articles and punctuation as well, including spacing around parentheses and comma use. More consistent control of these patterns would improve accuracy while preserving your range of sentence forms.

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.