Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-09-28
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 graph illustrate the perceived danger and actual likelihood of being crime types.
Overall, the car crime is the most significant factor in both the years. While violent crime and burgiary were indicating same propertion in perrecived crime. However, it was decreasing in actual propertion of both crimes.
In 2009-10 perceived crime and actual crime being a victim of car crime. it was showing significantly increased at 22% approximately.while it fell down to 17% in 2010-11. However, actual car crime was same percentage in both the years around 4%.
In violent perreceived crime was second most crime in graph it was declined from 15% to 13% in 2009-10 while their actual violent crime shared same percentage at 3% in both years.
finally, the burglary per recived crime was at a from 15% in [redacted phone] and slightly decreased to 13% all over the period, however, in their actual crime contributing equal no of propertin that was 3%.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0
The student attempts to address the task by reporting features from the bar chart regarding perceived and actual crime. However, the response suffers from significant inaccuracies in data interpretation and expression. For instance, the text states 'car crime is the most significant factor in both the years', which is accurate, but the specific figures provided ('22% approximately' and 'around 4%') are imprecise or poorly phrased. Furthermore, the overview is rather weak, and the body paragraphs contain confusing timelines and comparisons, such as 'it was declined from 15% to 13% in 2009-10'. While the main features are touched upon, the lack of precision and some confusion regarding years and percentages mean the response only partially satisfies the requirements. Band 5.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0
The response has a basic structure, including an introductory sentence and some paragraphing for body details. However, the logical progression is frequently disrupted by awkward transitions and confusing sentence construction, such as starting paragraphs with abrupt and ungrammatical phrases like 'In 2009-10 perceived crime and actual crime being a victim of car crime.' Cohesive devices are either missing, inadequate, or misused ('However', 'finally'), leading to a somewhat disjointed reading experience. Paragraphing is attempted, but internal cohesion within paragraphs is weak. Band 5.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.0
The vocabulary used is very basic and repetitive ('crime', 'actual', 'perceived', 'percentage'). There are frequent lexical errors and odd collocations throughout the text, such as 'burgiary', 'perrecived crime', 'properton', and 'per recived crime'. The student attempts to use some topic-related terminology, but limited control over word formation and spelling leads to noticeable errors that occasionally impede communication. Band 4.5, rounded to 5.0 based on the presence of some minimally adequate task vocabulary.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0
The grammatical range is extremely limited, relying heavily on simple structures and faulty attempts at complex sentences. There are frequent, persistent errors in punctuation, subject-verb agreement, tense consistency, and sentence fragments (e.g., 'In 2009-10 perceived crime and actual crime being a victim of car crime. it was showing significantly increased'). Many sentences are ungrammatical and obscure the intended meaning, requiring the reader to guess the writer's intent. Band 4.5, rounded to 5.0 due to a few successful simple sentences.
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.