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 and 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 was just over 15%, as compared to the actual victims which was approximately 2.5%. However these figures must be significantly higher in car crime, where the ratio of perceived crime was about 21%, while the actual crime ratio was just under 5%.

Between 2010 and 2011, the share of perceived crime was 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 were recorded in burglary crime approximately 13% and 2.5% respectively.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

The response addresses all parts of the task by covering the three crime types and making comparisons between perceived danger and actual likelihood across the two years. However, some parts are more fully developed than others, which is characteristic of this level. For instance, while the overview correctly notes that perceived crime remained significantly higher than actual crime and highlights car crime as having the highest ratio, the body paragraphs contain some minor data inaccuracies and confusion. When discussing the 2009 to 2010 period, the student states that figures 'must be significantly higher in car crime' when reading static data from a chart, and misattributes the 2010-2011 burglary figures in the final paragraph. Extending the data reporting with greater precision and ensuring all comparisons are clearly grounded without speculative phrasing would elevate the task achievement to the next level.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The writing demonstrates a coherent overall arrangement with a clear attempt at paragraphing, moving from an introduction and overview to specific body paragraphs detailing the data. Cohesive devices are used to guide the reader, such as 'Overall', 'However', and 'Meanwhile'. However, referencing and cohesion are sometimes mechanical or slightly faulty, such as the intrusive comma in 'compared to, the actual crime' in the overview, and awkward transitions between data points. Paragraphing is present, but logical progression within paragraphs could be smoother to avoid abrupt shifts between categories. To reach a higher band, the student needs to ensure that cohesive devices connect ideas more naturally and that referencing across sentences is consistently clear and precise.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

The response uses an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, successfully attempting less common items and topic-specific terms such as 'perceived threat', 'actual likelihood', 'elevated', and 'categories of crimes'. However, there are some inaccuracies in word choice and expression, such as referring to 'burglary crime' rather than 'burglary' and using the phrase 'figure of actual crime remained fluctuating and stayed moderate'. Spelling is generally accurate, but lexical control lacks the precision needed for higher bands, occasionally resulting in slightly unnatural phrasing or slight misuse of terms like 'ratio' when referring to percentages. To improve, the student should focus on precise collocations and more natural academic phrasing.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

The writer demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, utilizing structures such as subordinate clauses ('while the actual crime ratio was just under 5%'). There are some errors in grammar and punctuation, such as missing commas in compound structures and awkward prepositional phrases, but these errors rarely impede communication. Examples include the unnecessary comma after 'compared to' in the second paragraph and slightly flawed sentence boundaries. A greater variety of complex structures used with consistent accuracy would be required to move into the higher bands, along with closer attention to punctuation control.

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.