Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-08-04

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 compares the perceived danger and actual likelihood of being a victim of crime for the years 2009 and 2010. The crimes are burglary, car crime, and violent crime.

Overall, the perceived danger of being a victim of crime was significantly higher in every crime type for both years. While the percentages for an actual victim to perceived risk ratio had a substantial difference, as being an actual victim had a much lower percentage compared to the perceived risk.

21% of people perceived being a victim of car crimes in 2009 compared to 16% in 2010. Similarly, in 2009 more people perceived themselves as being a victim of burglary and violent crimes than in 2010 by approximately 2.5%.

The percentage of being involved in an actual crime was almost equal for both years, lightly less than 5% for car crimes, 2.5% for violent crimes and burglary.

In conclusion, the percentage for perceived danger of being a victim of crime was higher in 2009, whereas the percentage for actually being a victim was less than perceived risk, however, the percentage of actually being in a crime stayed even throughout different crimes.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5

You have successfully identified the main features of the graph, such as the disparity between perceived and actual crime rates. However, the report lacks precision regarding the data. For instance, you mention 'approximately 2.5%' for the difference in perceived crime, but the graph shows more specific variations that should be highlighted. Additionally, the actual likelihood figures are described as 'almost equal' and 'lightly less than 5%', which is vague. To reach a higher band, you must provide more accurate data points from the graph to support your comparisons, rather than generalizing the figures. The overview is clear, but the supporting details need to be more data-driven to fully satisfy the requirements of an Academic Task 1 response.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5

The response is logically organized with a clear introduction, overview, and body paragraphs. You use basic cohesive devices like 'Overall,' 'Similarly,' and 'In conclusion' to guide the reader. However, the progression between sentences is sometimes mechanical. For example, the transition between the second and third paragraphs could be smoother. The use of referencing is generally clear, though the connection between the 'actual victim' and 'perceived risk' could be better integrated to improve the flow of the argument. Paragraphing is used appropriately to separate the overview from the specific data points, which helps the overall readability of the report.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

You have an adequate range of vocabulary to convey the information, using terms like 'perceived danger,' 'actual likelihood,' and 'victim of crime.' However, the range is somewhat limited and repetitive. Phrases like 'percentage of being involved' and 'percentage for actually being a victim' are slightly awkward and could be expressed more naturally. There are no significant spelling errors, but the vocabulary lacks the precision and variety required for a higher band. To improve, try to incorporate more sophisticated synonyms for 'percentage' (e.g., 'proportion,' 'rate') and 'higher' (e.g., 'considerably greater,' 'surpassed').

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

You demonstrate a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. While the meaning is generally clear, there are some grammatical inaccuracies. For example, 'the percentage for an actual victim to perceived risk ratio had a substantial difference' is clunky and grammatically imprecise. You also use 'lightly less' instead of 'slightly less.' While these errors do not impede communication, they indicate a need for better control over complex sentence construction. The punctuation is generally correct, but the sentence variety could be improved by using more diverse subordinating conjunctions to link your ideas more effectively.

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.