Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 15 · 2026-09-22
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 graph illustrates the numbers of students were visiting a Carribbean island between 2010 to 2017.
Basically, this graph showed the data of visitors against the years. Three parameters were taken into consideration that includes: visitors staying on cruise ships, visitors staying on island, and total tourists.
The data of visitors staying on cruise ships was far increase in 2017 and was very less in 2010. from 2010 to 2013, the garph was almost stable but from 2014 the numbers were increased with years. This was reached at peak in 2017. The next parameter was visitors staying on island. This was almost stable in each year except [redacted phone]. From 2013 to 2017, the graph was almost static. The total number of visitors were greatly increase in 2017. As the time pases, the number were enhanced such as compared form 2012 when tourists were very less and now in 2017 the graph was reached at peak.
When compared this graphs with each other, it shows that definitely tourists increased in carribbean island but number in staying the island had been fall and staying on cruise had been risen.
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 student attempts to report the main features of the graph, mentioning the categories of visitors staying on cruise ships, on the island, and the total. However, the summary lacks a clear overview and contains several inaccurate descriptions of the data. For example, the writer claims that the number of visitors staying on the island was 'almost stable in each year except 2010-2011' and 'almost static' from 2013 to 2017, whereas the chart shows a distinct rise to 1.5 million in 2012-2013 followed by a decline to 1.25 million in 2016. Furthermore, the opening sentence misidentifies tourists as 'students'. While the response attempts comparisons, the lack of precise data reporting and the misinterpretation of trends restrict it to a Band 5.0.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0
The response is organized into multiple paragraphs, but the logical progression is weak. The introduction is confused by conversational meta-language ('Basically, this graph showed...'). Cohesive devices are used awkwardly or repetitively, such as 'The next parameter was...', 'This was almost stable...', and 'As the time pases, the number were enhanced'. Paragraphing does not follow a clear thematic structure, grouping distinct trends together without effective transitions. Reference pronouns like 'this' and 'these' are sometimes ambiguous, making it difficult for the reader to follow the flow of information smoothly. Overall coherence is hindered by these mechanical and occasionally faulty cohesive ties, corresponding to a Band 5.0.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The vocabulary used is very limited and repetitive. Words such as 'numbers', 'visitors', 'graph', 'stable', and 'peak' are repeated multiple times throughout the short text. There are also frequent word choice errors and unnatural collocations, such as 'far increase', 'very less' (instead of 'much lower' or 'fewer'), 'the graph was reached at peak' (instead of 'reached a peak'), and 'number in staying the island had been fall'. Spelling errors are present, such as 'Carribbean' (capitalization and spelling inconsistency), 'garph', and 'pases'. Because the lexical range is basic and errors impede precise communication, a Band 4.5 or 5.0 is appropriate, leaning to 5.0 for adequate task coverage.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 4.0
The student attempts a mix of simple and complex sentences, but grammatical accuracy is very poor throughout the response. There are frequent basic errors in verb tense, voice, and subject-verb agreement, such as 'the numbers of students were visiting' (passive/active confusion), 'the data of visitors staying on cruise ships was far increase', 'the number were enhanced', and 'When compared this graphs'. Preposition usage is also flawed, as seen in 'number in staying the island'. Complex structures are consistently faulty. These persistent errors frequently cause strain for the reader, placing the performance firmly in the Band 4.0 range.
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.