Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · 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 5.0)

The bar chart illustrates the chances between being a victim and percived danger in different types of crime conducted between 2009 and 2010.

Overall, the major crime which was percived and had most victim was related to car. lowest crime was burglary.

In 2009, perceived danger was highest for car crimes which was above 20 percent but actual rate of being victim was around 6 percent. However, in 2010 numbers for percived crime was decreased by approximately 5 percent. Although, burglary percived was 16 percent in 2009, victim was lowest among all crimes below 5 percent. Percived danger of Burglary in 2010 was decreased slightly by 4 percent and chances of being victim increased to 2 percent.

Voiolent crime percived same as burglary and chances of being actual victim was 6 percent which remained same for two years. However percived crime was decreased by 5 percee

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

The response identifies the broad pattern that car crime attracts the greatest perceived concern and burglary the least, and it attempts to compare perceived risk with actual victimisation. However, the account is incomplete and several figures or comparisons are inaccurate: actual car crime was about 4.5% in both years, not around 6%, and actual violent crime rose slightly from about 3% to 3.5%, rather than remaining the same. The final sentence is cut off, leaving the 2010/11 violent-crime comparison unfinished. The overview also says burglary was the “lowest crime,” which confuses crime type with likelihood. The response is four words below the required minimum. Include a complete overview and accurately report the main contrasts and changes.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

There is some basic organisation: an opening statement is followed by an overview and then details about the crime categories. The use of “Overall,” “In 2009,” and “However” helps signal the direction of the response. However, progression is uneven because the discussion moves between perceived and actual figures without consistently identifying the year or making the comparison clear. For example, the burglary sentence combines the 2009 perceived figure, actual rate, and 2010 perceived figure in a way that is difficult to follow. The final violent-crime sentence is incomplete, which disrupts the ending. Use separate, clearly focused sentences or paragraphs for the overview and comparisons, and make references such as “this figure” explicit.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

The response uses some relevant task vocabulary, including “perceived danger,” “actual rate,” “decreased,” and “increased,” so the reader can generally understand the intended comparisons. However, the range is limited and several word choices or collocations are inaccurate, such as “chances between being a victim and percived danger” and “crime conducted.” Repeated use of “percived” also includes a spelling error, while “most victim” does not express the intended idea naturally. These issues sometimes make the meaning less clear. Use precise chart language such as “perceived likelihood,” “actual victimisation rate,” and “was highest for,” and check spelling and word forms before submitting.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response attempts both simple and more complex sentences, including a contrast introduced by “Although” and clauses beginning with “which.” However, control is inconsistent, and errors can make relationships between ideas difficult to follow. For example, “the major crime which was percived and had most victim was related to car” has faulty clause structure and agreement, while “Although burglary percived was 16 percent in 2009, victim was lowest” lacks a clear grammatical subject in the second clause. Tense and sentence boundaries are also uneven, and the final sentence is unfinished. Build accurate comparisons with complete structures, such as “The perceived likelihood of burglary was about 16%, while the actual rate was around 2%.”

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.