Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-26

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 line graph illustrates average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per individual in United Kingdom,Sweden,Italy and Portugal from 1967 to 2007.Overall,heigest emissions of carbon dioxide was in United Kingdom and lowest in Potugal over the years.However,emission of CO2 in Sweden declined after increase in first year while Italy was in gradual climb.

In !967,emission of CO2 was over 10 metric tonnes per person in Uk which maximum emission as well.In contrast,Portugal had only around 1 metric tonne of CO2 emmsion,while Italy had just above 4 and Sweden had more then 8 metric tonnes per person.In next decade,CO2 emission in three country was significently goes up whereas Uk remain constant.

In year 1987and 1997 Portugal and Italy gradually rise roughly metric .On the other hand, Uk and Sweden droped. Eventually, In 2007 Portugal and Sweden were produssing approximetly 5 metric tonne CO2 per person and Italy ant around 6 and Uk had above 8 metric tonnes per person.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify the overall contrast between the UK’s highest emissions and Portugal’s lowest, and note Sweden’s rise followed by decline and Italy’s general increase. These are relevant main features. However, some comparisons are inaccurate or unclear: in 1977, emissions rose in Sweden, Italy and Portugal, while the UK stayed almost unchanged—not “three country” emissions generally rising if this is intended to include the UK. More importantly, by 2007 Italy was about 7.6 tonnes, not “around 6”; it was also above Sweden and Portugal, which were both about 5.4. The account of 1987 and 1997 is too vague to show the key changes clearly. Report the main figures and comparisons more precisely, especially the final ranking and Italy’s plateau.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction and overview are followed by chronological details, with a final comparison. Linking expressions such as “In contrast,” “On the other hand” and “Eventually” help signal relationships between points. However, progression is weakened by vague or incomplete statements, particularly “Portugal and Italy gradually rise roughly metric” and “Uk and Sweden droped,” which do not explain the changes or give a clear comparison. Some transitions are also awkward, and the final sentence combines several figures without clearly distinguishing the countries. Organise the details into clearer comparisons—for example, describe the UK and Sweden’s declines together, then contrast them with Italy and Portugal’s rises—and use complete, specific statements.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant task vocabulary, including “emissions,” “metric tonnes,” “declined,” “gradual climb” and “remain constant,” so the reader can generally understand the subject and trends. However, the range is limited and several inaccurate spellings or word choices reduce clarity: “heigest,” “Potugal,” “emmsion,” “significently,” “droped” and “produssing.” Some phrases are also imprecise or unnatural, such as “in gradual climb” and “around 6” for Italy’s final figure. Aim for accurate trend language and collocations, such as “rose steadily,” “fell gradually” and “remained stable.” Proofreading spelling and choosing precise terms for the data will make the description more fluent and reliable.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt a mixture of simple statements and longer sentences, including contrasts introduced by “while” and “whereas.” However, errors occur frequently, and some sentence patterns are faulty or incomplete. For example, “heigest emissions of carbon dioxide was” has a subject–verb agreement problem, while “In next decade, CO2 emission in three country was significently goes up” combines incompatible verb forms and has number and article errors. “In year 1987and 1997” also lacks a clear grammatical structure, and punctuation spacing is inconsistent. Practise forming accurate past-tense sentences with clear subjects—for example, “Emissions in Sweden, Italy and Portugal rose between 1967 and 1977, while the UK figure remained stable.” Check articles, plurals and verb agreement 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.