Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · 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 5.5)

The graph illustrates the potential danger and actual rate of being a crime victim over the period of one year from October 2009 to November 2010.

Overall, it is clear that the actual crime rate is below the perceived one. Car crime was perceived to be the highest crime but the actual crime rate fell below the perceived one in both years.

The victimisation rate for car crime was considered higher 21% in 2009 and 17% in 2010 but the actual crime rate was 4-5% in both years. Similarly, the percentage of potential threat is higher than 10% but in actual it is less than 5%.

The burglary was perceived to be greater than 15% and 14% but in actual is was around 2-3%. Moreover, violent crime shows percentages of 15% and 14% but in reality it is 3% in both years.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify the main overall contrast: perceived risk is much higher than actual victimisation, and car crime is highest in both measures. You also compare the two periods and include several relevant figures, such as perceived car crime falling from 21% to 17% while actual car crime stays around 4.5%. However, some details are imprecise: burglary perception is about 15.5% and 13%, not simply “greater than 15% and 14%,” and violent crime perception is about 15.5% and 13.5%. The statement that actual violent crime is 3% in both years misses the slight rise to about 3.5%. The response is also below the required 150 words. Add a clearer overview and report the key changes more accurately.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a coherent basic structure: an introduction, an overview, and two paragraphs comparing crime types. The sequence from the general contrast to car crime, burglary, and violent crime is easy to follow, and linking expressions such as “Overall,” “Similarly,” and “Moreover” help signal relationships. However, the comparisons are compressed into short statements, so the progression between the two years and across categories is not always fully developed. “Similarly” introduces a broad claim about perceived and actual percentages without specifying which crime types it refers to. Grouping the figures more systematically—for example, perceived figures together and actual figures together—would make the comparisons clearer and reduce the slightly mechanical use of transitions.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant topic vocabulary, including “perceived,” “actual crime rate,” “victimisation rate,” and “potential threat,” and the meaning is generally understandable. There is some repetition of “crime rate” and “perceived,” while a few expressions are not natural or precise for describing chart data. For example, “was considered higher 21%” needs a more suitable reporting phrase, and “the actual crime rate fell below the perceived one” describes the gap rather than a change over time. “Potential danger” in the introduction is also less precise than the chart’s distinction between perceived likelihood and actual likelihood. Aim for accurate, varied collocations such as “was estimated at” and “the actual figure remained.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You produce a mix of simple sentences and some more developed structures, including the contrast in “Car crime was perceived to be the highest crime but the actual crime rate fell below the perceived one.” Most sentences communicate the intended comparisons, but some grammatical errors and awkward constructions remain. In “was considered higher 21%,” the percentage needs a grammatical link, such as “was considered to be 21%.” The phrase “in actual it is less than 5%” is missing an article or suitable preposition, and “in actual is was around 2-3%” contains an incorrect verb form. There is also inconsistent tense use when describing past data. Check sentence patterns around figures and use past tense consistently.

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.