Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-09-20
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 gives data regarding danger and real victim of crime by the crime type.
Overall, it is evident that car crime was higher than other crime in actual or percieved type.
Look at the graph, Burgalry crime type accounted at 16% about percieved 2009/10, while it was 13% in percieved 2010/11. In contrast, Burgalry actual type crime at 2% in 2009/10, it increased slightly about 3% in 2010/11.Here, the percieved type crime was more in number than actual.
Car Crime type showed percentage of 22% in percieved 2009/10, where it decreased about 17% percieved 2010/11. Moreover, Actual type crime of Car about at 4% in2009/10, it remained stable at 4% in 2010/11. The percieved of being victim in crime outweighed in number than actual.
Furthemore, violent crime about percieved at 16% in 2009/10 and 13% in 2010/11 same as Burgalry crime. The actual tye violent crime accounted at 3% in 2009/10 and 4% in 2010/11.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5
The student attempts to address all parts of the task by reporting data for the three crime types across both perceived and actual likelihoods for the two years. However, the selection of data is somewhat mechanical, and there are several inaccuracies in the data reporting. For instance, the student states that burglary for perceived 2009/10 was 16% (actual is 15.5%) and car crime in perceived 2009/10 was 22% (actual is 21%). Furthermore, the overview statement is overly simplistic, only noting that car crime was higher than other crimes. While main features are touched upon, the lack of precision in figures and under-developed overview places this response at Band 5.5.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0
The response has a basic overall structure, attempting to group information by crime types in separate paragraphs. However, progression is frequently disrupted by awkward transitions and poor introductory referencing, such as 'Look at the graph'. Cohesive devices are used mechanically and sometimes inaccurately, such as 'In contrast' used inappropriately when comparing burglary figures between years rather than contrasting different categories. Paragraphing is attempted, but internal cohesion within sentences is weak due to fragmented clauses (e.g., 'while it was 13% in percieved 2010/11'). These issues align closely with Band 5.0.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The student uses an adequate range of vocabulary to discuss crime types and percentages, including terms such as 'accounted', 'decreased', 'remained stable', and 'outweighed'. However, there are notable spelling errors ('percieved' instead of perceived, 'Burgalry' instead of burglary, 'tye' instead of type) and awkward word choices or phrasing such as 'actual type crime' and 'real victim of crime'. The vocabulary is repetitive, and control over less common lexical items is limited. These lexical inadequacies and spelling mistakes are characteristic of Band 5.0.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0
The response contains a mix of simple and attempted complex sentence structures. However, grammatical accuracy is weak, featuring frequent errors in clause structure, preposition use, and verb forms. Examples include 'Burgalry crime type accounted at 16%' (missing passive voice or incorrect preposition), 'Car Crime type showed percentage of 22%' (missing article), and dangling or incomplete clauses such as 'where it decreased about 17% percieved 2010/11' and 'Moreover, Actual type crime of Car about at 4% in2009/10, it remained stable...'. These persistent errors cause some difficulty for the reader and reflect a Band 5.0 performance.
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.