Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-08-06

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 bar chart compares the perceived danger and actual likelihood of being a victim of crime that are namely,Burglary,car crime ,and violet crime in between 2009 to 2011.

Overall,the perceived danger that increased the car crime ,while burglary and violent crime remained at the same level in terms of actual likelihood of being a victim.

Initially,the perceived danger represented highest percentages .

In 2009 to 2010 ,the perceived danger increased by 20% in the form of car crime whereas,Actual likelihood of being a victim stood at approximately 17% which was the second highest percentage in [redacted phone].It means changes occurred in car crime .

Furthermore, Burglary and violent crime remained same level related to perceived danger followed by the proportion of approximately 14% in 2010 to 2011, meanwhile burglary and violent crime remained at the same position the percentage of around 15% in terms of actual likelihood of being a victim in 2010 to 2011.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0

The response attempts to summarize the data but fails to clearly distinguish between the categories and the trends. The description of the data is confusing, particularly the claim that 'perceived danger increased the car crime' and the vague references to 'changes occurred in car crime.' The report lacks a clear overview of the main trends, and the data points cited are difficult to reconcile with the provided graph. The analysis is under-developed and lacks the precision required for an Academic Task 1 response, as it does not effectively compare the perceived versus actual likelihood across the three crime types.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0

The essay is organized into paragraphs, but the progression of ideas is not logical. The use of cohesive devices is mechanical and sometimes inaccurate, such as the repetitive use of 'in terms of' and 'in 2009 to 2010.' The referencing is often unclear, making it difficult for the reader to follow the comparison between the perceived danger and actual likelihood. The lack of clear signposting between the different crime categories hinders the overall flow of the report.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.0

The vocabulary is limited and repetitive. There are errors in word choice and collocation, such as 'violet crime' (likely meant 'violent crime') and 'remained same level related to perceived danger.' The range of vocabulary is insufficient to describe trends or data points with precision. The student relies on basic phrasing, which limits the ability to convey the information effectively. More precise terminology related to data description, such as 'fluctuated,' 'remained stable,' or 'a significant discrepancy,' is needed.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0

The response contains frequent grammatical errors, including missing articles ('the car crime'), incorrect prepositions, and awkward sentence structures. While there is an attempt to use complex sentences, they are often faulty, leading to a lack of clarity. Punctuation is also inconsistent, with missing spaces after commas. The errors are frequent enough to occasionally impede the reader's understanding of the data being presented. A greater focus on basic sentence construction and subject-verb agreement is necessary to improve the accuracy of the 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.