Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-14

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 given graph illustrates the calculated threat and actual probability of being a victim of various kinds of crime in year 2009, 2010 and 2001.

Overall, the calculated percentage of probability of crime has always been significantly more than the actual crime however another noteable feature of the graph is that the proportion of comitted crimes has increased in 2011 as compared to 2009.

The percentage of percieved likelihood of being a victom of bulgary and voilent crime shows a similiar pattern, standing at almost 15% in year 2009 and 2010 while approximately 13% in year 2010 and 2011. The actual proportion of bulgary is reported as almost 3%, which is almost five times less than the perceived crime proportion. This percentage slightly excceds in year 2011. Voilent crime on the other hand, excceds 3% in both year but reman less than 5%.

Furthermore, the actual likelihood of car crimes in year 2009, 2010 and 2011 remains alomst 5% with a slight decrease in 2011 while the percieved probability remains almost four times higher in year 2009 and falls to 16% in year 2011.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify the central contrast accurately: perceived risk is much higher than actual victimisation, and car crime has the highest perceived and actual figures. You also note that actual figures rise slightly in 2010/11. However, the overview is imprecise when it says perceived likelihood is “always” higher without clarifying the scale of the gap, and the description of trends contains confusing year references. The chart compares only 2009/10 and 2010/11, not “2009, 2010 and 2001.” Some figures are also inaccurate: perceived burglary and violent crime are about 13–13.5% in 2010/11, while actual burglary is about 2–2.5%, not almost 3% throughout. Select the two periods consistently and report the main comparisons more precisely.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, an overview, and two detail paragraphs. The grouping of burglary and violent crime, followed by car crime, gives the reader a workable progression, and connectors such as “Overall” and “Furthermore” help signal shifts. However, the progression is weakened by unclear time references, including “year 2009, 2010 and 2001” and repeated references to “year 2011,” although the chart labels are two-year periods. Some links are also awkward or unclear, as in “however another noteable feature,” and the final paragraph combines several comparisons without a clear sequence. Use the exact period labels and organise each paragraph around a consistent comparison.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use a relevant range of chart vocabulary, including “proportion,” “actual likelihood,” “percentage,” and “slightly,” and the reader can generally understand the intended comparisons. However, several word choices and collocations are inaccurate or unnatural: “calculated threat” does not mean perceived likelihood, “actual crime” is less precise than actual victimisation, and “the proportion of committed crimes” misrepresents what the chart measures. Spelling errors such as “percieved,” “victom,” “bulgary,” “voilent,” and “alomst” are noticeable and reduce control. Aim for precise, repeated terminology rather than substituting loosely related expressions: use “perceived likelihood” and “actual likelihood of victimisation,” and check spelling carefully.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex sentences, including a contrastive structure in “Voilent crime on the other hand…” and a comparison using “which is almost five times less.” Most sentences remain understandable, but some grammatical choices make relationships unclear. For example, “in year 2009, 2010 and 2001” has an incorrect time reference and lacks a clear plural construction; “while approximately 13% in year 2010 and 2011” is an incomplete clause; and “remains … with a slight decrease” shifts awkwardly between present and past reporting. There are also agreement and article issues, such as “both year.” Use consistent past-tense reporting and complete clauses, with the chart’s two periods stated accurately.

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.