Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 4.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-11-14

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 4.5)

There is a graoh given below which demonstrates the preceived danger and actual likelihood of being a victim of crime.

There are few consequetive steps that involves information by selecting and reporting the main features ,make comparisons where relevant.

In 2009/10 people perceived likelihood of being victim of crime involves 15 % of burgalry, 20% of car crime and 15% percent of violent crime Meanwgile, the actual likelihood of being a victim of crime ratio is less than 5% in burgalry, in car crime ratio is almost about to 5% and the ratio in violent crime is a littlr bit less than ratio in car crime.

In 2010/11 people believed that likelihood of being victim of violent crime involves almost 15% percent of burglary, the ratio in car crime is above than 15% and the percentage in violent crime is less than 15 on the other hand the actual crime rate is negligible.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.0

You identify the chart’s subject and report several relevant figures, including the higher perceived likelihood of car crime in both periods and the much lower actual figures. However, the response has no clear overview of the main pattern, and some comparisons are vague or inaccurate: “the actual crime rate is negligible” does not distinguish the three categories, while the 2010/11 burglary figure is described as “almost 15%” rather than about 13%. The 2009/10 perceived figures are broadly close to the chart. The response also contains 127 words, below the required 150; 26 words copied from the task prompt were not counted. Add a concise overview and develop the key changes and contrasts with accurate figures.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.0

The response follows a basic time-based order, first discussing 2009/10 and then 2010/11, so the reader can recognise the intended comparison. However, the information is not arranged into clear paragraphs or a coherent report structure, and there is no distinct overview to guide the reader. The opening sentence about the graph is followed by an unnecessary statement that there are “few consecutive steps,” which does not report data. Linking is also limited: “Meanwhile” and “on the other hand” are used, but the relationships between some details remain unclear. Organise the response into an introduction, an overview, and two concise detail paragraphs, grouping perceived and actual figures consistently.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some relevant task vocabulary, such as “perceived,” “actual likelihood,” “percentage,” and the crime categories, which makes the topic recognisable. However, the range is limited and several spelling and word-choice errors make the report less clear, including “graoh,” “preceived,” “burgalry,” and “littlr.” Some phrases are also unnatural, such as “ratio is almost about to 5%” and “the actual crime rate is negligible.” Use precise chart language and check spelling carefully. For example, describe figures as a “proportion” or “percentage,” and use “approximately” or “just under” when reporting values. Avoid repeating “ratio” when comparing percentages.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

The response attempts connected sentences and uses time references to distinguish the two periods, but grammatical control is inconsistent and the sentence structures are mostly simple or awkwardly joined. Examples include “There are few consecutive steps that involves,” where the subject and verb do not agree, and “people perceived likelihood of being victim,” which is missing necessary articles and grammatical structure. The long 2010/11 sentence also combines several comparisons without clear punctuation, making the meaning difficult to follow. Use complete, direct sentences with accurate articles and agreement, such as “People perceived the likelihood of burglary as about 13%.” A wider range of controlled sentence patterns would make comparisons clearer.

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.