Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-01

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 6.0)

The graph depicts the perceived threat and actual likelihood of being a victim of crime.

Overall, it is clear that, the ratio of perceived crimes remained high as compared to, the actual crime.

However, the figure of actual crime remained fluctuating or stayed moderate; in addition, the highest ratio of crimes was recorded in car crime.

From 2009 to 2010, the share of perceived crime remained elevated in all categories of crimes, such as burglary crime, car crime, and violent crime. In burglary crime the ratio of victims is just over 15%, as compared to the actual victims which is approximately 2.5%. However these figures must be elevated in car crime, where the ratio of perceived crime is about 21%, while the actual crime ratio is just under 5%.

Between 2010 and 2011, the share of perceived crime is also high. Meanwhile, the ratio of actual crime in all categories also witnessed a slight increase. Additionally, the lowest figures of actual and perceived crimes was recorded in burglary crime approximately 13% and 2.5% respectively.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

The response successfully addresses all parts of the task by outlining the main features and making relevant comparisons between perceived and actual crime figures. An overview is provided, noting the general trend that perceived crime rates were significantly higher than actual rates, and car crime recorded the highest percentages overall. However, some ideas are under-developed or contain minor inaccuracies in data interpretation. For instance, the text mentions that the share of perceived crime remained elevated from 2009 to 2010, but fails to consistently highlight key numerical comparisons across all years with equal precision. While the general picture of the graph is captured, extending the commentary with more precise comparisons between the categories would elevate the task response.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response maintains a coherent overall arrangement with a clear attempt at logical progression. The writing is divided into appropriate paragraphs, starting with an introduction, moving to an overview, and then detailing specific data in the body paragraphs. Cohesive devices are used to guide the reader, such as 'Overall', 'However', and 'Between 2010 and 2011'. Nevertheless, referencing and cohesion are sometimes faulty or mechanical. For example, expressions like 'these figures must be elevated in car crime' create awkward transitions and unclear referencing. To reach a higher level, the flow between sentences needs to be smoother, ensuring that cohesive devices connect ideas more naturally without feeling forced.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

The writer demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, successfully incorporating terms such as 'depicts', 'perceived threat', 'likelihood', and 'fluctuating'. There are attempts to use less common vocabulary items related to statistics and crime, which show a sufficient range for communicating the main features of the chart. However, there are some noticeable inaccuracies in word choice and phrasing, such as 'the ratio of perceived crimes remained high as compared to, the actual crime' and confusing 'elevated' with higher values in a comparative context. Spelling and word formation are generally accurate, and errors do not impede communication, but refining collocations and word choices would strengthen this aspect.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

The response employs a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, demonstrating attempts at varied structures like subordinate clauses introduced by 'as compared to' and 'while'. There are some grammatical errors and punctuation slips present, such as unnecessary commas ('it is clear that, the ratio' and 'compared to, the actual crime') and tense or preposition slips like 'lowest figures... was recorded' instead of 'were recorded'. These errors are typical of a mix of structures where control slips slightly when attempting more complex phrasing. Importantly, the errors rarely impede communication, allowing the reader to follow the main points easily. Greater control over subject-verb agreement and punctuation accuracy is needed for a higher band.

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.