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 perceived risk and actual probability of becoming a victim of crime are displayed in the given bar graph. Overall, the perceived victim in 2009/10 was always more than perceived in 2010/11. However, The actual victim of two crimes were more in 2010/11 as compared to 2009/10 but in crime of car it was vice versa.

In burglary crime, the perceived danger had 15.5% and 13% in 2009/10 and 2010/11 while the actual likelihood was just 3% and 3.5%, respectively. Similarly, the ratio of perceived victim was highest around 21% in 2009/10 in car crime but 17% in 2010/11. However, the actual victim percentage was also highest in car crime, such as 4.5% and 4% approximately, by contrast of other crimes.

Additionally, the perceived amount of violent crime was almost similar to the burglary in both years; whereas, the actual ratio was only 3% and 3.5% in 2009/10 and 2010/11 years. By contrast, the perceived ratio was more than 20% in crimes; nevertheless, the actual ratio was minimal than 5%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify the main contrast: perceived risk is much higher than actual victimisation for all three crimes, and you compare both years. Several figures are also reported accurately, including perceived car crime at about 21% and 17%, and the decline in perceived burglary. However, some actual figures are inaccurate: burglary is about 2% and 2.5%, not 3% and 3.5%; car crime is about 4.5% in both years, not 4.5% and 4%; and violent crime is about 3% and 3.5%. The overview also reverses the trend for actual crime, claiming two categories rose when all three rose slightly. Select the key patterns accurately and make the overview more precise.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has an introduction, an overview, and paragraphs that compare the crime categories, so the reader can follow its general subject. However, the progression is not consistently clear: the overview says actual victimisation increased in two crimes, then the body gives figures that do not support this claim. Linking expressions such as “Similarly,” “Additionally,” and “By contrast” are used, but some do not clearly express the relationship between the information that follows. The final sentence repeats the broad perceived-versus-actual contrast rather than adding a distinct comparison. Grouping the data by perceived and actual rates, or by year, and using links only where the comparison is accurate would make the organisation more coherent.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use a reasonable range of topic-related terms, including “perceived risk,” “actual likelihood,” “percentage,” and “by contrast,” and the meaning is generally understandable. However, several expressions are awkward or imprecise, such as “the perceived victim,” “the ratio of perceived victim,” and “the actual victim percentage.” These refer to people rather than the likelihood or proportion of people affected, making the data description less clear. “Minimal than 5%” is also an inaccurate collocation. Aim for consistent, natural terms such as “perceived likelihood,” “actual rate,” and “below 5%.” This would improve precision without requiring more complicated vocabulary.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt a mix of simple and complex sentences, including a contrast with “However” and a clause introduced by “whereas.” Nevertheless, errors occur frequently and sometimes make comparisons difficult to interpret. For example, “the perceived victim in 2009/10 was always more than perceived in 2010/11” lacks a clear grammatical comparison, while “the actual victim of two crimes were more” has problems with both the noun phrase and subject–verb agreement. Capitalisation after “However” is inconsistent, and the long final sentence joins contrasting ideas awkwardly. Practise forming clear comparative sentences with the figures as subjects, and check agreement, articles, and punctuation when combining clauses.

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.