Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-25

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)

This graph show the average carbon dioxide emissions on per person.

The graph shows that, emission of carbon dioxide in United kingdom10.75 metric tonnes in 1967, which is gradually deaceased,and in 2007 the emissions of carbon dioxide reaches to the 8.75 metric tonnes.

The emissions of carbon dioxide in Sweden, on per person starts from 8.75 in 1967, then slighty increased till 10 .25 in 1977. After that, the emission of carbon dioxide on per person significantly decresed and reaches to the 7 metric tonnes in 1987. Then again graph shows the little decrease in emission of carbon dioxide on per person in sweden, which is 5.25 ,in 2007.

The emission of carbon dioxide per person, in Italy was 4.50 in 1967, then it dramatically increased with fluctuations till 1997, then graph shows a straight line till the 2007. In portugal the emissions of carbon dioxide starts from 1.25 metric tonnes in 1967. it significantly increased till 4.25 in 2007.

this graph shows the emissions of carbon dioxide per person in Uk, Sweden,Italy and Portugal. the emission of carbon dioxide in Uk and Sweden starts from high amout of metric tonnes then is slowly and gradually deaceased, in 2007. The emission of carbon dioxide per person in Italy and Portugal starts from low amount of metric tonnes and slowly gradually increased in 2007

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You cover all four countries and identify the broad contrast between the initially high figures for the UK and Sweden and the lower starting figures for Italy and Portugal. Several reported values are close to the chart, and you correctly note the UK’s decline and Italy’s rise followed by a plateau. However, some key details are inaccurate or unclear: Portugal reaches about 5.4 tonnes in 2007, not 4.25, and Italy rises steadily rather than “with fluctuations.” The overview is also repeated at the end instead of clearly highlighting the main final comparison: the UK remains highest, while Sweden and Portugal finish at roughly the same level. More precise selection and reporting of these features would strengthen the response.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable sequence, moving through the countries and ending with a general comparison, so the reader can follow its overall subject. However, the organisation is not fully effective: the opening is very brief, the country-by-country paragraphs repeat similar wording, and the final paragraph largely restates earlier points rather than providing a concise overview. Linking phrases such as “After that” and “Then again” help show sequence, but some connections are mechanical, and the relationship between the figures and the trends is not always expressed clearly. Grouping the two declining series together and the two rising series together, with a distinct overview, would create clearer progression and reduce repetition.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant topic vocabulary, including “emissions,” “metric tonnes,” “increased,” and “decreased,” and the main subject remains understandable. However, the range is limited by repeated use of “emission of carbon dioxide on per person” and “graph shows,” while several expressions are inaccurate or unnatural, such as “reaches to” and “starts from high amount.” Spelling errors including “deaceased,” “slighty,” and “decresed” also reduce accuracy. Aim for more precise trend language and natural collocations, for example, “per-capita emissions,” “rose to,” and “fell steadily.” This would make the description more concise and improve clarity without requiring unnecessarily complex vocabulary.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and longer sentences, including clauses linked with “which” and “then,” but control is inconsistent. Errors appear in basic sentence formation and agreement: “This graph show” should be “This graph shows,” and “the emissions … starts” should be “the emissions … start.” Some sentences lack a complete grammatical structure, as in “then slighty increased till 10 .25,” while tense and article use are also uneven. Punctuation and capitalisation need attention, particularly at sentence boundaries and with country names. These problems sometimes make the trend descriptions harder to interpret, although the intended meaning is generally recoverable. Practise accurate past-tense reporting and build longer sentences from correctly formed 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.