Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-08-19
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 bar graph illustrates the potential risk and real chances of falling victim of crime from 2009 to 2011. The data can be calibrated in percentage.
Overall, it is clear that car crime used to be major danger while the least risk was Burglary as well as violent crime.
Having a brief look at the graph it is evident that the danger for crime were 16% while the victims were 3% in 2009 and 2010 whereas the crime was slightly declined in 2010 and 2011 while the people who suffered was more than before, it comprised of Burglary. However, the car crime were above 20% and the individuals who caught in this crime were close to 5% in 2009 and 2010. Nonetheless, the perceived harm was approximately 17% in 2010 and 2011 and the victims were almost similar.
Moving further, violent crime was recorded around 15% and the likelihood of being victim were 3% in 2009 and 2010, Although the perceived risk were between 10% to 15% in 2010 and 2011 yet the victims were alike.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0
The response attempts to summarize the data but struggles with clarity and accuracy. While you identify the main categories (car crime, burglary, violent crime), the description of the data is often confusing. For instance, the phrase 'the danger for crime were 16% while the victims were 3%' lacks specific context regarding which crime type is being discussed. Furthermore, the interpretation of the trends is occasionally inaccurate, such as stating crime 'slightly declined' when the graph shows specific figures for different years. To improve, ensure each data point is clearly linked to its corresponding category and year, and avoid vague generalizations that make it difficult for the reader to follow the trends.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5
The essay is organized into paragraphs, which is a positive step. However, the progression of ideas is often disjointed. The use of cohesive devices is limited and sometimes mechanical or misused, such as 'Moving further' or 'Nonetheless,' which do not always logically connect the preceding and following sentences. Referencing is also unclear; for example, in the third paragraph, it is difficult to determine which specific crime type the '16%' refers to. To improve, focus on using transition signals that accurately reflect the relationship between ideas and ensure that each paragraph has a clear, singular focus on a specific aspect of the data.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The vocabulary is somewhat limited and repetitive. You rely on basic terms like 'danger,' 'risk,' and 'victims' throughout the response. There are also issues with word choice and collocation, such as 'calibrated in percentage' (should be 'expressed as percentages') and 'individuals who caught in this crime' (should be 'individuals who were victims of this crime'). To reach a higher band, try to incorporate more precise academic vocabulary related to data description, such as 'proportion,' 'incidence,' 'perceived,' and 'actual,' and ensure that your word choices are contextually appropriate.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0
There are frequent grammatical errors that occasionally impede communication. Subject-verb agreement is a consistent issue, such as 'the danger for crime were' (should be 'was') and 'car crime were' (should be 'was'). Additionally, there are errors in sentence structure, such as 'it comprised of Burglary,' which is grammatically incorrect. The range of structures is limited, consisting mostly of simple sentences with some attempts at complex ones that are often faulty. Focusing on basic subject-verb agreement and ensuring that your sentences are complete and correctly punctuated will significantly improve the clarity of your 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.