Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-04

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, comparisons between three types of crime like burglary, car and violent crime that can perceived and actual likhelihood in person affected by crime.

Durning 2009/10, the ratio of perceived burglary, car and violent offence were roughly 15% and 22%and 16%, respectively. On the other hand, actual portion burglary, car and violent unlawful act included portion approximetly 2%, 4% and 3%, consequently. Meanwhile, the highest portion shared by car crime in both categeories of crime.

During 2010/11, percentage of preceived types crime like burgalary, car and violent crime fell to upto 13%,17% and 14%, respectively. In contrast, actual crime portion Gradually changed. The portion of burgalry was slightly rise but car rime rate dip to 3% and violent crime go upward upto just 3.5%.

Overall, in both cenario car crime rate had the highest then others crimes. On the same time, burglary is lie in the lowest crime portion

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

The response addresses all parts of the prompt by selecting and reporting the main features of the chart, including comparisons between perceived and actual crime rates for burglary, car crime, and violent crime across the two years. A clear overall trend is also identified, noting that car crime consistently held the highest proportions while burglary was the lowest. However, some aspects are under-developed or imprecise, such as minor inaccuracies in reading specific figures and vague phrasing in places. To reach a higher level, the report should ensure data points are cited with greater precision and provide a more fully developed analysis of the key differences between perceived and actual threat levels.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The report presents a coherent overall arrangement with a discernible structure that moves logically from an introduction to body paragraphs divided by years, concluding with an overview. Paragraphing is attempted, though transitions and referencing are sometimes mechanical or awkward, as seen in expressions like 'On the other hand, actual portion...' and 'Meanwhile, the highest portion shared by car crime...'. While the information is generally easy to follow, cohesive devices are occasionally overused or misused, resulting in a lack of smooth progression. To improve in this criterion, the writer should focus on employing a wider and more natural range of cohesive links to connect sentences and clauses seamlessly.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

The writer demonstrates an adequate vocabulary range to communicate the main points of the task, attempting less common terms such as 'perceived', 'proportions', and 'unlawful act'. However, there are notable limitations and errors in word choice, spelling, and word formation throughout the text. Examples include 'likhelihood' instead of 'likelihood', 'approximetly', 'burgalary', 'categeories', and unnatural collocations such as 'actual portion burglary'. These lexical inaccuracies and spelling slips do not severely impede communication, but they restrict the score to this band. To achieve a higher band, the writer must expand their vocabulary control, ensure accurate spelling, and use precise domain-specific terminology without basic errors.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response attempts a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, demonstrating some control over basic structures. However, there are frequent grammatical errors involving subject-verb agreement, prepositions, articles, and word forms. Examples include 'comparisons between three types of crime like burglary, car and violent crime that can perceived', 'the ratio of perceived burglary... were roughly 15%', 'The portion of burgalry was slightly rise', and 'car crime rate had the highest then others crimes'. While these errors rarely completely obscure the meaning, they are persistent enough to prevent the grammar score from rising. To improve, the writer needs to focus on accurate verb tense consistency, preposition usage, and careful proofreading of complex sentence structures.

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.