Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-08-29

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The graph below shows the average monthly change in the prices of three metals during 2014.

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

Average monthly change in prices of copper, nickel and zinc (2014)

Student answer (Band 5.5)

The provided line graph illustrates the change in price of three metals namely, copper, nickel and zinc on a monthly basis in 2014.

Overall, the price of nickel and copper has been dropped while the price of zinc had increased at the end of the year. Furthermore, a trend is observed as all three metal prices were lowest in June.

The detailed analysis of the graph showcases the fall in the price of copper as it slumped from 6% in January to -3% in June but bounced back to 1% in December. Similarly, the price of nickel has also decreased significantly from 2% in January to -0.5% in June but also decide to bounce back to 1.5% at the end of the year.

Although, the price of zinc had skyrocketed in February reaching 3%, it dropped back reaching -1% in June but unlike copper and zinc, it has bounced back to 2% at the end of December which is higher than where it started(1%) in January.

AI examiner evaluation

CriterionBand
Task Achievement / Task Response5.5
Coherence and Cohesion6.0
Lexical Resource5.5
Grammatical Range and Accuracy5.5
Overall5.5

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5

You have successfully identified the main features of the graph and provided a clear overview. You selected relevant data points to support your descriptions, such as the low point in June and the year-end figures. However, there are some inaccuracies in your data reporting. For instance, you stated copper 'slumped from 6% in January', but the graph shows it starting at approximately 2%. Additionally, you mentioned 'unlike copper and zinc' when referring to zinc's recovery, which is confusing as you had already discussed copper. To improve, ensure your data extraction is precise and your comparisons are logically consistent.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.0

The response is logically organized with a clear introduction, overview, and body paragraphs. You use cohesive devices such as 'Furthermore', 'Similarly', and 'Although' to connect ideas. However, the referencing is occasionally unclear, such as in the final paragraph where you compare zinc to 'copper and zinc' instead of 'copper and nickel'. Paragraphing is used appropriately to separate the different metals. To reach a higher band, ensure that your cohesive devices are used with more precision to avoid logical contradictions in your comparisons.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

You demonstrate an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, using terms like 'slumped', 'skyrocketed', and 'bounced back' to describe trends. There are some minor issues with word choice, such as 'decide to bounce back', which is not appropriate for describing inanimate data trends. The vocabulary is generally sufficient to convey your meaning, but it lacks the sophistication and precision required for higher bands. Focusing on more academic collocations and avoiding personification of data will help improve your score in this area.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. There are several grammatical errors, such as 'the price of nickel and copper has been dropped' (passive voice error) and 'the price of zinc had increased' (tense inconsistency). Additionally, there is a missing space in 'started(1%)'. While these errors do not impede communication, they occur frequently enough to prevent a higher score. To improve, focus on consistent tense usage—specifically using the past simple for data from 2014—and ensure subject-verb agreement is accurate throughout your writing.

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.