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 given image is of a line graph which illustrate the emission of carbon dioxide per person in different countries . This graph shows carbon dioxide discharge in United kingdom,Sweden, Italy, Portugal in year between 1967 to 2007 . It is the record of 40 years of CO2 emission in metric tonnes.

If we look closely it is clearly seen that the graph is divided in four catagories such as Italy , portugal ,UK. The x-axis of graph shows the years of average carbon dioxide emission per person whereas the y-axis demonstrate carbon dioxide release in a particular units. In 2007, the line graph shows maximum value in united kingdom. On the other hand, in 1967, the graph shows minimum value in portugal country.

It is to be noted that in case of Italy in the year 1967 , emission starts increasing at 4 metric tones but at the same time when we see from 1977 to 1997 there is no such change on the release rate . In 2007 it becomes constant from 1997. In case of UK it remains constant still in 1967 to 1977. From 1977 carbon emission gradually slows down till 2007 .

Sweden case looks stunningly different because it increases till 1977 but it suddenly slows down upto 7 tonnes in 1987. It slowly starts declining and in 2007 its emission rate is 5.5. Portugal release rate increase till 1987 approximately 3. Then it increase upto 4.5 in 1997 and remains constant till 2007.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

You identify the four countries and report several relevant trends, including the UK’s overall decline, Sweden’s peak in 1977 followed by a fall, and Portugal’s rise. However, the overview is incomplete and includes a key contradiction: you say the UK has the maximum value in 2007, although Italy and the UK are both higher than Sweden and Portugal, with the UK still highest. More importantly, Italy does not remain broadly unchanged from 1977 to 1997; it rises from about 6.3 to 7.6 tonnes. Portugal also reaches about 5.2 in 1997, not 4.5. The response therefore selects relevant information but reports some trends inaccurately and does not clearly summarise the main overall comparisons. Give a concise, accurate overview before describing the country-by-country details.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable sequence: an introduction, a brief description of the axes and extremes, and then paragraphs of country-specific detail. Phrases such as “On the other hand,” “In case of UK,” and “Sweden case” help signal shifts between points. However, the progression is not consistently clear because the overview is mixed with individual details, and the country comparisons are mostly presented as separate notes rather than connected comparisons. Some linking is repetitive, particularly the repeated “In case of” construction, while references such as “it” can be unclear. Organise the report into a clear overview followed by grouped comparisons—for example, declining emissions in the UK and Sweden versus rising emissions in Italy and Portugal—and use linking expressions selectively.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant topic vocabulary, including “emission,” “metric tonnes,” “gradually,” “declining,” and “constant,” so the reader can generally understand the subject and trends. There is some variation in how you describe movement, but several choices are inaccurate or unnatural for a graph report. “Carbon dioxide discharge” and “release rate” are less precise than “emissions,” and “the graph is divided in four catagories” does not describe the four data series naturally. Spelling and form errors such as “catagories,” “tones,” and inconsistent capitalisation of country names also reduce control. Aim for precise, conventional collocations and avoid decorative wording such as “stunningly different”; straightforward descriptions of rises, falls, peaks, and plateaus are more effective.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mixture of simple statements and longer clauses, including “If we look closely…” and the contrast between Sweden’s rise and subsequent fall. However, sentence structures are often awkward or incomplete, and errors in agreement, articles, and prepositions recur. For example, “a line graph which illustrate” needs subject–verb agreement, while “in year between 1967 to 2007” has an incorrect preposition pattern. “The y-axis demonstrate” also requires agreement, and several sentences join ideas without clear grammatical control. Tense use is generally understandable, but the repeated present-tense descriptions and inconsistent sentence construction make the report less fluent. Practise accurate basic clauses first, then add subordinate clauses and comparisons while checking agreement and prepositions.

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.