Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-08-25

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

Perceived and actual likelihood of being a victim of crime: by crime type

Student answer (Band 6.5)

The bar graph depicts the presumed and actual percentages of becoming a victim of crimes, which are burglary, car crime and violent crime, for the years 2009/10 and 2010/11. At a glance, presumed and actual percentages of car crime were higher than other categories of crimes in the given duration.

To begin with, in 2009/10, car crimes were assumed to be around 22%, while the actual figures was much lower than that (nearly 4%). In the following year, the numbers of car crime were nearly 17% (perceived) and 4% (actual) respectively. Surprisingly, the perceived figures for both burglary and violent crime were nearly equal ( approximately 16%) over the years. While the percentages of actual events of burglary were around 3% in 2009/10 and 4% in 2010/11. Moreover, the figures of actual violent crimes were nearly equal in 2009/10 ( about 4%) and 2010/11 (nearly 4.5%).

Overall, the perceived crime percentages were much higher than actual crime percentages for the given crime types, but the number of presumed and actual car crime was the highest among the 3 categories.

AI examiner evaluation

CriterionBand
Task Achievement / Task Response6.5
Coherence and Cohesion6.5
Lexical Resource6.0
Grammatical Range and Accuracy6.0
Overall6.5

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.5

The response covers all parts of the task by identifying the main features and making relevant comparisons. You have successfully highlighted the discrepancy between perceived and actual crime rates and identified the trends for the three categories. However, the analysis could be improved by more clearly contrasting the data points. For instance, while you mention that perceived rates were higher than actual rates, you could have explicitly compared the magnitude of this gap across the different crime types. The overview is present but could be more analytical by highlighting the most significant trend, such as the consistent overestimation of crime risk across all categories.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.5

The response is logically organized with a clear introduction, body paragraphs, and a summary. Paragraphing is used appropriately to separate the data points. You use cohesive devices such as 'To begin with', 'In the following year', and 'Overall' to guide the reader. However, some transitions are slightly mechanical, and the flow between sentences could be smoother. For example, the transition between the discussion of car crime and the other two categories could be more fluid. Overall, the progression of ideas is clear, and the information is easy to follow.

Lexical Resource — Band 6.0

You demonstrate an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, using terms like 'presumed', 'categories', and 'discrepancy' (implied). There are some minor inaccuracies, such as using 'numbers of car crime' when referring to percentages, and 'actual events of burglary' which is slightly awkward phrasing. To reach a higher band, try to incorporate more precise collocations related to data description, such as 'a significant disparity' or 'a marked contrast'. The vocabulary is sufficient to convey the meaning clearly, but lacks the sophistication required for higher bands.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 6.0

The response uses a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. There are some grammatical errors, such as 'actual figures was' (should be 'were') and 'the numbers of car crime were' (should be 'the percentages of car crime were'). Punctuation is generally accurate, though there are some minor issues with spacing around parentheses. While the errors do not impede communication, they are frequent enough to prevent a higher score. Increasing the variety of complex structures and ensuring subject-verb agreement would improve your score in this criterion.

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.