Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-11-05

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The graph below shows the perceived danger and actual likelihood of being a victim of crime.

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

Perceived and actual likelihood of being a victim of crime: by crime type

Student answer (Band 5.0)

The given graph elucidates information about the victim of crime by crime type during the years the chart compares different catagories and presents the data in percentages for proper illustration.

Overall, it is evident that there are noticeable differences among the catagories shown in the chart, furthermore the percentages of car crime is 20% in preceived 2009 apeared to be the highest crime as compare to the burglary or violent crime, while in perceived 2010 to 11 burglary is the lowest percentage crime its percentage is 3%. in addition, all catagories showed mixed reasults with some fluctuations with stability, incrementas wel as decrement.

Talking about the highest so the car crime is apeared to be the highest in perceived 2009 to 10 and in the middle the crime of burglary and violent crime is in the middle there percentages are 15% are same in perceived 2009 so in the perceived 2010 t0 11 the car crime is less than the first perceived. For some more understanding headings towards the perceived 2009 to 10 the crime rate is low its percentages are not above than 5% percent in all crimes so it apeared to be the lowest.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

You identify car crime as the highest perceived category in 2009/10 and note that burglary and violent crime were similar, which are relevant comparisons. However, the response gives an unclear and sometimes inaccurate account of the chart: the 3% figure is attributed to burglary in 2010/11, although that category is about 13% perceived and 2.5% actual. The statement that actual crime rates are all below 5% is broadly correct, but it is assigned to the wrong period and is not clearly distinguished from perceived figures. There is no reliable overview of the large gap between perceived and actual likelihood, or of the modest changes between years. Select the main patterns accurately and separate the four series when reporting figures.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.5

The response has an opening, an overview-like paragraph and a further discussion, so there is an attempt to organise the information. However, the progression is difficult to follow because ideas are repeated and comparisons shift without clear links. For example, the second paragraph moves from perceived car crime to burglary and then to mixed fluctuations, while the final paragraph returns to the same categories and introduces actual rates without a clear transition. Connectors such as “furthermore,” “in addition” and “so” are used, but they do not consistently show the relationship between ideas. A clearer structure would present an overview first, then compare perceived figures across years, followed by actual figures, using precise references to each series.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You attempt task-related vocabulary such as “percentages,” “categories,” “fluctuations” and “crime rate,” and use comparison language including “highest” and “less than.” This gives you a basic range for describing the chart. However, repeated wording and inaccurate or awkward choices make some points difficult to understand: “the victim of crime by crime type” and “the highest crime” do not clearly describe perceived likelihood, while “mixed results with some fluctuations with stability” is vague. Spelling errors such as “catagories,” “preceived,” “apeared” and “incrementas” are noticeable. Use standard chart-description collocations, for example “the perceived likelihood of burglary” and “the actual rate,” and check spelling carefully.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt longer sentences and use clauses introduced by “while” and “in addition,” but control is inconsistent, and several sentences are difficult to parse. For instance, “during the years the chart compares different catagories” lacks a clear grammatical connection, and “the percentages of car crime is 20%” has a subject–verb agreement error. The sentence beginning “Talking about the highest” also contains unclear clause structure and tense use. Punctuation is often missing or misplaced, especially where several ideas are joined in one sentence. Practise writing shorter, complete comparisons first, then combine them with accurate clauses. Check agreement, articles and sentence boundaries, as in “the percentage for car crime was about 21%.”

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.