Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 4.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-08

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 4.5)

The bar chart illustrate to shows the perceived danger and actual likelihood of being a victim of a crime.

Overall, the perceived and actual likelihood of being of victim of the crime. by three type of the crime. The first of the Burglary and second Car crime. The third of the Violent crime.

First of all, The first type of the crime Burglary and the perceived 2009/10 is the percentages 15.1% and Actual 2009/10 is the percentages of 3% and perceived 2010/11 is the percentages if 13% and actual 2010/11 is the percentages of 3.5%. The Second type of the crime is Car crime is perceived 2009/10 is the percentages of 22% and Actual 2009/10 percentages of 4.7% and perceived 2010/11 is the percentages of 17% and actual 2010/11 is the percentages of 4.5%.

Second of all, The third type o the crime Violent crime is perceived2009/10 is the percentage of 15% and Actual 2009/10 is percentages of 4% and perceived 2010/11is the percentages of 13% and actual 2010/11 is the percentages of 4.2%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

You identify the chart’s subject and report figures for all three crime types, so the response is relevant to the task. However, the overview does not summarise the main patterns: it mainly lists the categories, rather than noting that perceived risk is much higher than actual victimisation and that car crime is highest in both measures. Several figures also differ from the chart: for example, burglary’s actual rate in 2009/10 is about 2%, not 3%, and violent crime’s actual rate is about 3%, not 4%. The response therefore gives only a partial account of the key information. Add a clear overview and select accurate comparisons to make the main features easier to understand.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0

The response has a basic paragraph structure: an introduction, an attempted overview, and two paragraphs covering the crime categories. The sequence from burglary and car crime to violent crime is understandable. However, progression is limited because the overview repeats the task wording without presenting a clear summary, and the body paragraphs mainly follow a repetitive list format. Phrases such as “First of all” and “Second of all” do little to show meaningful comparisons, while repeated constructions such as “is the percentages” make the links between figures cumbersome. Organise the body around comparisons—for example, perceived versus actual risk, then changes between years—and use concise linking language to guide the reader.

Lexical Resource: Band 4.5

Vocabulary is sufficient to identify the chart’s basic subject and categories, using terms such as “perceived,” “actual,” “Burglary,” and “Car crime.” However, the range is narrow and repetitive, with “type of the crime” and “percentages” used repeatedly instead of more precise reporting language. Several word-choice and form errors strain clarity, including “perceived danger” where “perceived likelihood” would be more exact, and “the perceived 2009/10 is the percentages.” Use a wider set of accurate chart verbs and comparison phrases, such as “stood at,” “was higher than,” and “declined,” while keeping the crime labels consistent. This would make the report more natural and precise.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

The response attempts an introduction and several longer reporting sentences, but grammatical control is weak and the sentence patterns are very limited. Errors occur frequently in basic structures: “The bar chart illustrate to shows” has faulty verb construction, while “the perceived and actual likelihood of being of victim” contains article and preposition problems. In the body, repeated forms such as “is the percentages” and “perceived 2010/11 is the percentages if 13%” make relationships between the subject and figures difficult to follow. Capitalisation and punctuation are also inconsistent, including unnecessary capitals after commas and full stops. Practise clear patterns such as “The perceived figure for burglary was 15.5%, compared with an actual rate of 2%,” and check agreement, articles, and sentence boundaries.

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.