Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

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

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 bar graph illustrates that, for Burglary, the percentage of perceived crime in [redacted phone] is about 15% whereas the actual crime occuring is lower and plummets to 2%. The percentage of perceived car crime is about 21% which is the tallest bar but the actual crime occuring is only 4% which is also the tallest among the other 3 bars for actual crime. For violent crime, the graph demonstrated that the perceived crime is about 15% and the actual crime is 3%. Among all these 3 crimes, the highest percentage of perceived crime is the car crime and the highest actual crime occuring is also the car crime. The actual violent crime bar is taller than the actual burglary crime. The bar of perceived crimes for burglary and violent crime is of the same height.

The bar graph for perceived crime in [redacted phone] is the tallest for car crime which is about 16% and the actual crime occuring is 4%. Subsequently, the bar for perceived violent crime is the second highest which is about13.5% but the actual crime is 3.5%. Finally the bar for perceived crime for burglary is the shortest in camparison to the other bars and the actual crime is 2.5% which is also the lowest among the 3 actual crimes.The bar for actual violent crime is taller than actual burglary.

Ultimately, the graph demonstrated that over the years, the perceived crime has decreased but for burglary and violent crime, the actual crime has increased over the years aaaaand for car crime the percentage of actual is almost the same from year [redacted phone].

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You cover all three crime types and both years, and your comparisons are generally grounded in the chart. The overview that perceived figures fell while actual burglary and violent crime rose slightly, and car crime stayed almost unchanged, captures the main trend. You also correctly identify car crime as highest in both perceived and actual figures. Some details are less fully reported: the 2010/11 perceived burglary figure is omitted, and the comparison between years is left mainly to the final sentence rather than supported with figures. Also, the 2010/11 perceived car-crime value is closer to 17% than 16%. A clearer overview followed by a few accurate year-to-year comparisons would make the key features more fully developed.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a coherent overall arrangement: it first describes the earlier period, then the later period, and ends with a summary of changes. This makes the information easy to follow, and linking expressions such as “Finally” and “Ultimately” help signal progression. However, the repeated pattern of describing each crime in turn makes some points feel like a list, while the most important comparison across years is postponed until the conclusion. Some linking is also mechanical, particularly “Subsequently” and “Finally” in the second paragraph. Grouping the data by perceived versus actual likelihood, or explicitly comparing the two years within each crime type, would create a more purposeful progression. Check punctuation at paragraph boundaries, including the missing space after “crimes.”

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use enough topic vocabulary to communicate the chart, including “perceived,” “actual,” “percentage,” and “tallest.” However, the range is limited by repeated wording such as “the bar,” “crime,” and “percentage,” and several choices are imprecise or unnatural for describing data. “The actual crime occurring” is repeated where “the actual rate” or “the proportion of victims” would be clearer; “plummets” also overstates the comparison between perceived and actual figures. There are spelling errors in “occuring” and “camparison,” and “about13.5%” needs spacing. Aim for concise, accurate chart language and vary terms carefully rather than relying on repeated descriptions of bar height.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and more complex sentence forms, and the meaning is generally clear. For example, the sentence beginning “The percentage of perceived car crime…” combines a comparison with a relative clause effectively. Some grammatical errors remain, but they rarely prevent understanding. In “the percentage of perceived crime in 2009-2010 is,” the present tense is less suitable for past data; use “was.” The phrase “the actual crime occurring is lower and plummets to 2%” also has an unclear subject and tense relationship. In addition, “the bar … is of the same height” is awkwardly constructed, and the final sentence runs together several ideas without clear punctuation. Use consistent past-tense reporting and check 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.