Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-02

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 5.5)

The bar chart illustrates the percentage of predicted danger and the percentage of real crimes that occured during 2009/10 and 2010/2011. Additionally, this chart showed three types of crimes, which are burglary , car crime and violent crime.

Overall, car crime is the one singular crime which was conducted the highest both in 2009/10 and 2010/11. Moreover, the percieved percentage were the highest as well fo this crime type. On the contrary, burglary happened in a very limited ammount in the aforementioned timeframe, which was also predicted to be less when we compare it to the other crime types.

In 2009/10 car crimes were assumed to happen about 22% of the total crime , while only 4% of these type of crime actually happened in real life. Similarly, in 2010/11, 17% was the assumed proportion where as , the real percentage was same like 2009/10.

Furthermore, burglary and violent crimes were about the same ratio in terms of prediction in 2009/10 while violent crimes became slightly higher than burglary in 2010/11. If we compare this date for the true events that actually took place, burglary is in the lower side in both timeframe.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

The response addresses the main parts of the prompt by summarizing the bar chart comparing perceived danger and actual likelihood of three crime types across two years. However, the development of ideas is limited and some data reporting lacks precision. For instance, the writer states that car crimes were assumed to happen about 22 percent in 2009/10, whereas the chart shows a perceived figure of around 21 percent. Furthermore, the overview is somewhat simplistic, stating only that car crime was the highest. While key features are touched upon, the lack of full extension and minor inaccuracies in data reading keep the task response at the present level. To reach a higher level, the writer should ensure data is cited more accurately and provide a more fully developed, comprehensive overview of the main trends.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response demonstrates a coherent overall arrangement with a clear attempt to structure the essay into paragraphs, including an introduction, overview, and body paragraphs. Information is generally organized logically, moving from general trends to specific crime comparisons. However, cohesion is at times mechanical or faulty. The use of transitional phrases like 'Additionally' and 'On the contrary' is somewhat repetitive or imprecise in context, and referencing could be smoother, such as when referring back to 'this date' or 'this type of crime'. Paragraphing is present, but the logical progression between sentences within paragraphs could be improved for better flow. To progress, the writer needs to use a wider and more flexible range of cohesive devices without over-relying on basic connectors.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

The vocabulary used is adequate for the task, allowing the student to convey basic ideas about crime percentages. There are attempts to use less common vocabulary, such as 'aforementioned', 'proportion', and 'assumed', but these are accompanied by lexical inaccuracies and awkward word choices, such as 'predicted danger', 'real crimes that occured', and 'limited ammount'. Spelling errors like 'occured', 'percieved', and 'ammount' are also present. These errors do not completely impede communication, but they restrict the lexical score. To achieve a higher band, the writer should expand their range of vocabulary, improve word choice and collocations, and eliminate basic spelling mistakes.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

The writer attempts a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, utilizing clauses and comparative structures. However, there are frequent grammatical and punctuation errors that affect clarity. Examples include subject-verb agreement issues like 'this chart showed three types of crimes, which are', awkward prepositions in phrases like 'conducted the highest both in', and punctuation slips such as unnecessary spaces before commas. Complex sentence attempts often contain structural flaws, such as 'while only 4% of these type of crime actually happened', where 'these type' is grammatically incorrect. To improve, the writer needs to exercise greater control over grammatical structures, ensure correct singular/plural agreement, and reduce basic sentence-level errors.

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.