Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 15 · 2026-09-04
IELTS Writing Task 1 question
The graph below shows the number of tourists visiting a particular Caribbean island between 2010 and 2017.
Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.
Student answer (Band 6.0)
The graph illustrates the duration of 7 years between 2010 and 2017, during which millions of visitors visited a specific Caribbean island.
Overall, a total of 3.5 million tourists stayed on the island. Some guests stayed on the cruise ships, and others on the island. A subsequent increase was shown in both types. The combined effect demonstrated a dramatic increase in visitors.
The visitors staying on the cruise ships were approximately 0.3 million, but in 2011, it moderately increased to 0.5 million, while in 2012, it fell to 0.3 million again. In 2013, it reached 0.5 million tourists, then showed an upward trend until 2017, peaking at 2 million visitors.
The guests staying on the island, in 2010, numbered nearly 0.7 million and remained the same until 2011. After that, it showed a subsequent increase until 2015 and reached 1.5 million tourists, while in 2016, it dropped to 1.3 million, and in the last year, it again climbed to 1.5 million.
The total lines showed that the trend fluctuated during these 7 years. It started from 1 billion and touched 3.5 million. Hence , the number of visitors to the Caribbean island peaked during these years.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 6.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 6.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 6.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 6.0 |
| Overall | 6.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.0
The response covers the main features of the graph, identifying the trends for both cruise ship and island visitors. However, the overview is slightly inaccurate; stating that a 'total of 3.5 million tourists stayed on the island' is a misinterpretation, as 3.5 million represents the combined peak of both categories in 2017, not the total over the period. Additionally, the mention of '1 billion' in the final paragraph is a significant factual error that misrepresents the data provided in the graph. While the key trends are identified, the lack of precision in data reporting and the inclusion of incorrect figures prevent this from reaching a higher band.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.5
The essay is organized into logical paragraphs, with an introduction, body paragraphs for each category, and a concluding summary. Cohesive devices such as 'while', 'after that', and 'in the last year' are used to link ideas. However, the progression of ideas is occasionally mechanical, and the referencing is sometimes unclear, particularly in the final paragraph where the summary of the 'total lines' is confusingly phrased. The transition between the description of the two categories could be smoother to improve the overall flow of the report.
Lexical Resource — Band 6.0
The vocabulary is generally adequate for the task, with attempts to use descriptive terms like 'upward trend', 'peaking', and 'moderately increased'. However, there are instances of imprecise word choice, such as 'duration of 7 years' (which should be 'period of 7 years') and the misuse of '1 billion' instead of '1 million'. The range of vocabulary is sufficient to convey the main points, but it lacks the sophistication and precision required for higher bands. The repetition of 'tourists' and 'visitors' is noticeable, though it does not impede communication.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 6.0
The response uses a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. While many sentences are clear, there are recurring grammatical errors, such as 'A subsequent increase was shown in both types' (which is slightly awkward phrasing) and 'The total lines showed that the trend fluctuated'. Punctuation is generally acceptable, though there is an unnecessary space before the comma in 'Hence ,'. The control of grammar is sufficient to maintain clarity, but the frequency of minor errors prevents a higher score. The majority of sentences are understandable, but the structure is not consistently error-free.
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.
