Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 15 · 2026-09-12
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 5.0)
The line graph illustrate compares quantity of tourists visiting a particular Caribbean island among 2010 to 2017.
Overall, line graph illustrate us information about specific Comparison of three types of tourists one of those whose staying on cruise ships. Most of tourists staying on island and thirdly discuss about the total numbers of tourists whose visiting the Caribbean Island. On the left side of line graph illustrate us numbers of visitors and on the down side graph we see years for comparing graph from 2010 to 2017.
Taking a closer look of line graph a significant change in total numbers of tourists whose visiting Caribbean Island. In 2010 one million of tourists then they highly rises up in 2017 at bigger number of 3.5 million. Secondly we compares those visitors whose staying on island became normal at 1 to 1.5 millions tourists among 2010 to 2017. At the end the number of tourists whose staying on island was declined from 2011 to 2012 nevertheless the number of visitors gradually increased from 2013 and crash the number visitors of cruise ship at 2 million.
Additionally, the total number of visitors significantly rises up at 3.5 million and the number of visitors whose staying on cruise ships and island becomes normal 1.5 to 2 million from 2010 to 2017.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 4.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0
The response attempts to address the task by summarizing the information from the graph, identifying key features such as the overall trend and categories of tourists. However, the interpretation of the data is confused and inaccurate in several places. For instance, the text states that 'the number of tourists whose staying on island was declined... crash the number visitors of cruise ship at 2 million', which misrepresents the visual data on the graph. Furthermore, comparisons are poorly executed and hard to follow. While the overview attempts to outline the main trends, the lack of precision and inaccurate reporting of figures place this response firmly in Band 5.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0
The text is divided into four paragraphs, showing some attempt at organizing an introduction, overview, and body details. However, there is no clear overall progression, and the logical development is severely hampered by poor referencing and confusing phrasing, such as 'Secondly we compares those visitors...' and 'At the end the number of tourists...'. Cohesive devices are either missing or misused, leading to a mechanical and repetitive structure. Paragraphing is attempted, but internal cohesion fails to guide the reader smoothly through the data, aligning with Band 4.5 or rounded to Band 5.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The vocabulary used is very basic and repetitive. Phrases like 'bigger number of 3.5 million', 'became normal', and 'highly rises up' demonstrate a very limited lexical range. There are noticeable word choice and collocation errors throughout the text, such as 'quantity of tourists' instead of 'number of tourists' and 'whose staying' instead of 'who are staying'. These errors cause some difficulty for the reader in understanding the precise meaning, reflecting the descriptors for Band 5.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 4.0
The response shows a very limited range of grammatical structures. Most sentences contain significant errors, including missing auxiliary verbs, incorrect relative pronouns, and tense confusion (e.g., 'The line graph illustrate compares', 'Most of tourists staying', and 'visitors significantly rises up'). Complex sentence attempts are frequently faulty and distort meaning. Punctuation is also erratic. These frequent errors cause considerable difficulty for the reader, matching the criteria for a Band 4.5, which is reported as 4.5 or 5.0; here, due to pervasive grammatical errors, a Band 4.0 is appropriate.
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.