Band 4.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 4.0 · Cambridge IELTS 15 · 2026-10-21
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 4.0)
Number of tourists visiting CERBIAN ICE LAND in millions Ice land is very beautiful and popular country it has great weather and peace full country IN 2010 the ratio of visitor is very grow 2.5 milion and the governmat give the ficilities to tourist in 2011 the the ratio grow up on 0.5 % such as 0.5 milion tourists and after one year the oersantage was dwon in 2013 the persantage is stable and the tourist is again 2.5 milions whenever in 2014 the ratio of tourist is grow up ubove the 1 milion and in 2015 the persantage is not grew up because due to some governamental issue and after in 2015 the ratio of visitor is also increase and last in 2017 the rato is 2.5 millon above or the tourist make very good in ice land i will also want to visit the ice lamd after i was graduated
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 3.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 3.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 4.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 4.5 |
| Overall | 4.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 3.5
The response makes an attempt to describe changes over time, but it does not accurately report the graph’s main information. For example, it says the total was 2.5 million in 2010, whereas the chart shows about 1 million; it also gives 2.5 million for 2017, when the total is approximately 3.5 million. The account mixes up totals and individual visitor categories, and claims about the island’s beauty, weather, government facilities and “governmental issue” are not supported by the visual. There is no clear overview identifying the overall rise in total visitors or the contrasting patterns of the two groups. Focus on the chart, distinguish totals from category figures, and summarise the main trends before adding selected accurate comparisons.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 3.5
There is a loose chronological sequence, with references to 2010, 2011 and later years, so the reader can recognise that the response is intended to describe a timeline. However, the ideas are presented as one long, run-on passage, without paragraphs or a clear overview followed by supporting details. Connectors such as “and after,” “whenever,” and “last” do not reliably show how the information relates, and the repeated shifts between visitor ratios, government claims and personal comments interrupt progression. Group the information into a brief overview and a body organised around the total and the two visitor categories. Use a small number of accurate linking phrases to make comparisons and changes clear.
Lexical Resource: Band 4.0
The response uses a few task-related terms, including “tourists,” “ratio,” “percentage,” and “million,” showing an attempt to discuss numerical information. However, vocabulary is repetitive and often inaccurate or difficult to interpret: “the ratio of visitor is very grow” and “the percentage was down” do not clearly describe the chart’s figures. Several spellings, such as “CERBIAN ICE LAND,” “governmat,” and “millon,” also reduce clarity. Informal or irrelevant wording such as “very beautiful” and “I will also want to visit” is unsuitable for an objective graph summary. Build a precise set of trend and comparison expressions, and check spelling and collocations before writing.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5
The response attempts to connect ideas in longer sentences, for example with “and after one year” and “because due to,” but these structures are not controlled consistently. Errors in verb forms and agreement appear in phrases such as “the ratio … is very grow,” “the percentage is stable,” and “the tourist make very good.” Articles, plurals and sentence boundaries are also problematic, as in “the ratio of visitor” and the extended opening sentence, which lacks clear punctuation. These errors often make the intended meaning hard to follow, although some basic time references and simple clauses can be understood. Practise writing short, complete sentences with accurate past-tense verbs, then combine them using clear punctuation.
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.