Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-11

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 about three types of crime which perceived differently than actual in two years 2009 and 2010.

The crime which happened more than others was car crime at top and the lowest crime was violent crime.

First,crime was burglary which perceived in 2009 were 16 cases and actual nunbers were not more than 2 cases like that, in 2010 they perceived 13 cases and actual numbers did not more than 3 cases.

Second, if we look for car crime in 2009 more than 20 cases perceived than the actual were not more than 5 cases.Moreover,also in 2010 that recorded almost 17 cases and only 4 were actual cases.

Third case was about violent which recorded as 15 cases in 2009 but actual numbers of cases were just 3,while these cases in 2010 were recorded more than 13 and actual were only 3 cases.

In conclusion,all perceived crime cases were more than actual.The higher attempted crime was care crime and others two crime were lower.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You cover all three crime types and both years, and your central comparison—that perceived likelihood was much higher than actual likelihood—is accurate. You also identify car crime as the highest category. However, the overview is imprecise: calling violent crime the “lowest crime” overlooks that burglary and violent crime have similar perceived figures, while burglary has the lowest actual figures. Some details are also inaccurate or unclear: for example, violent crime was perceived at about 13.5% in 2010/11, not simply “more than 13,” and the chart shows likelihood percentages rather than numbers of cases. To strengthen the response, give a clearer overview of the main patterns and compare the changes between years more explicitly.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, a sequence covering burglary, car crime and violent crime, and a concluding statement. The signposts “First,” “Second” and “Third” help readers follow the categories, and the overall comparison is easy to identify. However, the progression is somewhat mechanical, and the conclusion repeats the point that perceived figures exceed actual ones without adding a useful summary of the trends. Some links are awkward or unclear, such as “Moreover,also in 2010,” while punctuation spacing makes several transitions harder to read. Grouping the two years within each crime type is workable, but clearer comparisons between categories and years would make the information flow more naturally.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use enough topic vocabulary to communicate the main comparisons, including “perceived,” “actual,” “recorded” and “higher.” However, the range is limited and some word choices are inaccurate for a chart about percentages: “cases” and “crime which happened” suggest counts of incidents rather than perceived or actual likelihood. Phrases such as “actual numbers did not more than 3” and “higher attempted crime” are not natural or precise, and “care crime” appears to be a spelling or word-choice error for “car crime.” Aim to use consistent chart language, such as “percentage,” “likelihood” and “figure,” and choose verbs that describe data accurately, for example “stood at” or “fell to.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

You attempt some longer sentences and use time references to distinguish the two periods, but grammatical control is uneven and errors sometimes make relationships between ideas difficult to follow. Examples include “which perceived differently than actual,” “in 2009 were 16 cases,” and “actual numbers did not more than 3 cases”; these need clearer clause structure and correct verb forms. Articles and sentence boundaries are also inconsistent, as in “First,crime” and “In conclusion,all.” Most sentences follow a simple pattern, so the response shows limited variety, while attempts to combine comparisons are often faulty. Practise accurate comparative structures, such as “the perceived figure was higher than the actual figure,” and check tense, articles and punctuation.

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.