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 the percieved danger and actual danger of being a victim of crime in 2009/10 and 2010/11. Information is presented of three crime types : Burglary, Car crime and Violent crime.

It is noted that all the perceived crimes reduces over the period of time. On the other hand actual crime is almost similar in all three types. The highest precieved crime is of Car crime where as the other two are almost at similar percentages.

Perceived crime of burglary drops from almost 16% in 2009/10 to around 13% in 2010/11. Car crime experiences the highest perceived crime which drops from almost 21% to approximately 17%. Violent crime followes the same trend as Burglary in perceived crimes.

On the other hand, the actual crime is slightly increasing in Burglary from 2% to 3% in 2010/11. However, Car crime actually reduces by 1% and lastly the violent crime stays around 3% over the span of time.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You identify the chart’s subject and cover all three crime types across both periods, with a clear overview that perceived risk fell while actual figures changed little. The comparisons for perceived burglary and car crime are broadly accurate, and you correctly identify car crime as the highest perceived category. However, some actual figures are misreported: burglary rises from about 2% to 2.5%, not 3%, and car crime remains around 4.5%, rather than reducing by 1%. Violent crime rises slightly from 3% to 3.5%, so saying it “stays around 3%” understates the change. The overview is relevant, but more precise reporting of actual data and a clearer comparison of the large gap between perceived and actual risk would make the account more complete.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a clear overall arrangement: an introduction, an overview, then separate discussion of perceived and actual crime. This makes the main comparisons easy to follow, and transitions such as “On the other hand” help signal contrast. The progression is generally coherent, though the overview repeats the contrast between perceived and actual figures without fully developing it, and the final paragraph’s sequence (“However… and lastly…”) feels somewhat mechanical. Some links between claims could be clearer—for example, explain directly that actual rates are far below perceived rates in every category. Grouping each crime type’s perceived and actual figures together, or using more varied comparison language, would create smoother cohesion and a more integrated account.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant chart vocabulary, including “perceived,” “actual,” “drops,” “increasing,” and “over the span of time,” so the meaning is generally clear. However, the range is somewhat repetitive, especially through repeated use of “crime” and “drops,” and several word-choice or spelling problems reduce precision. “Perceived danger” is more suitable than “perceived crimes,” since the chart measures likelihood or risk, not the crimes themselves. “Experiences the highest perceived crime” is also an awkward collocation; “has the highest perceived likelihood” would be clearer. There are spelling errors such as “percieved” and “followes,” and “where as” should be written as “whereas.” More accurate chart-related vocabulary and careful proofreading would strengthen this criterion.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You use a mixture of simple and more complex forms, including contrast clauses beginning “On the other hand” and the relative clause “where the other two…”. Most sentences remain understandable, but some grammatical errors recur. In “all the perceived crimes reduces,” the plural subject requires “reduce”; “Violent crime followes” also needs singular agreement (“follows”). The phrase “Information is presented of three crime types” has an awkward grammatical construction; use “Information is presented for three crime types.” Punctuation and spacing around colons are inconsistent, and the opening sentence could be more precisely structured. These errors do not generally prevent understanding, but more reliable subject–verb agreement and cleaner sentence construction are needed for stronger 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.