Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 4.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-15

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 4.5)

In 2009/10 the precieved crime of bulgary was about 15 percent and actual was 2 percent and precieved bulgary crime in 2010/11 is 10.5 percent and actual crime was about 3 percent .In 2009/10 the preceived car crime was about 20.1 percent and actual crietaria was about 4 percent and in 2010/11 it was 13 percent preceived and 4 percent actual.In 2009/10 the precived violent crime was about 15 percent and actual was 4 percent and in 2010/11 the precived violent crime was 13 percent and actual was 3.5 percent.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.0

You identify all three crime categories and compare perceived with actual likelihood across both years, so the response is relevant to the chart. However, it mainly lists figures and gives no clear overview of the main pattern, such as perceived risk being much higher than actual risk in every category. Several figures are also inaccurate: burglary perception in 2010/11 is about 13%, not 10.5%; car-crime perception is about 17%, not 13%; and actual violent crime in 2009/10 is about 3%, not 4%. The response is also 60 words below the required minimum. Add an overview and select accurate comparisons before detailing figures.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.0

The information follows a basic sequence, moving through burglary, car crime and violent crime, and the repeated year references help readers identify the comparisons being made. However, the response is presented as one continuous block, with no introduction or overview to guide the reader. Repeated openings such as “In 2009/10” and “in 2010/11” make the organisation list-like rather than showing the most important relationships between the data. Separate the response into a brief introduction and overview, followed by logically grouped details. Linking comparisons—for example, noting that car crime had the highest perceived and actual figures in both years—would make the progression clearer.

Lexical Resource: Band 4.5

You use a small set of relevant terms, including “actual,” “percent,” and the crime categories, which makes the general subject recognisable. However, vocabulary is basic and repetitive, and several spelling errors make the response harder to read: “precieved,” “bulgary,” and “preceived.” The phrase “actual crietaria” is not an appropriate way to describe the chart’s actual crime figures, and “the precieved car crime” is awkwardly formed. Use accurate chart language such as “perceived likelihood,” “actual rate,” and “percentage.” Check spelling carefully and vary reporting verbs and comparison phrases so the response can describe patterns, not just repeat labels.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

The response uses simple sentence patterns to report figures, and the reader can generally follow the intended comparisons. However, the structures are repetitive, with several statements joined into long strings using “and,” and punctuation is inconsistent, including missing spaces after full stops. For example, “...2 percent .In 2009/10...” needs clearer sentence boundaries. The sentence patterns also lack variety: most follow the same subject–figure–year sequence. Practise forming complete, well-punctuated sentences and using comparison structures such as “while” or “whereas.” This would improve control and make relationships between perceived and actual figures easier to understand.

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.