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

Student answer (Band 6.5)

The bar chart gives information about the perceived danger and actual likelihood of being a casualty in a crime, of which the three different crime types are burglary, car crime and violet crime in year 2009/2010 and 2010/2011, and the values are all expressed in percentages.

Overall, between the two distinct years, the rate at which danger was perceived in the three different crime types was greater in 2009/2010 than the late year. Moreover, the percentage of perceived danger for the three crime types was higher than the actual likelihood of being a victim of a crime in the two different years.

Car crime had the highest value of perceived threat at 22% and 17% respectively in 2009/2010 and 2010/2011 followed by Burglary that recorded higher percentage in 2009/2010 than violent crime at16% and both witnessed the same rate of perceived harm at 13%. Meanwhile, violent crime had the lowest value for perceived danger at 15%. Car crime still maintained the greater percentage in actual likelihood of being a casualty in a crime in the two years than the rest of the crime types at 4% and 3.5% respectively. This was followed by violet crime that experienced a slightly lower rate than car crime at 2.7% and 3% respectively. Finally, burglary was the crime type that was at the lowest rate in the actual likelihood of being a victim in the two years at 1.5% and 2% respectively.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.5

You have successfully identified the main features of the graph and made relevant comparisons between the crime types and the two time periods. You provided a clear overview of the trends, noting that perceived danger consistently outweighed actual likelihood. However, there are some inaccuracies in your data reporting. For instance, you stated that car crime had the highest perceived threat at 22% and 17%, which is correct, but your description of the burglary and violent crime figures is slightly confusing and contains minor misinterpretations of the data points. To reach a higher band, ensure that all data points cited are precise and that comparisons are clearly linked to the specific years mentioned.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.5

The response is logically organized into an introduction, an overview, and two body paragraphs. You use cohesive devices such as 'Overall', 'Moreover', 'Meanwhile', and 'Finally' to guide the reader through the information. However, some of the transitions between sentences are a bit mechanical, and the referencing is occasionally unclear, particularly in the third paragraph where the comparison between crime types becomes slightly muddled. Improving the flow between sentences and ensuring that pronouns or comparative phrases clearly refer back to the correct data would enhance the overall coherence of the report.

Lexical Resource — Band 6.0

You demonstrate an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, using terms like 'perceived danger', 'actual likelihood', and 'casualty'. There are some minor errors in word choice, such as using 'violet crime' instead of 'violent crime' and 'late year' instead of 'later year'. While these errors do not impede communication, they indicate a need for more careful proofreading. To improve, try to incorporate more precise academic collocations and ensure that technical terms are spelled correctly throughout the text.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, which is appropriate for this task. There are some grammatical slips, such as 'of which the three different crime types are...' which is slightly awkward, and 'both witnessed the same rate of perceived harm at 13%', where the subject reference is ambiguous. Punctuation is generally functional, though some sentences could be tightened for better clarity. The majority of your sentences are clear, and errors do not prevent the reader from understanding the data, which is consistent with a band 6.0 level.

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.