Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-18

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 chart compares the percentage of who thought they would beome victims of three types of crime - bulgary, car crime and violent crime with the actual percentage who did, in 2009/2010 and 2010/11.

Oveall, it clear taht greatly people overestimated the risk of tree types of crimes. In addition, both the precieved and atual figure fell in a sacond year.

In 2009/10 the peceived car crime at highest 21% while the actual car crime at 4%.15% citizens thought that they wold be victims in bulgary crime but the actual figure is 2%. For violent crime 10% preceived the risk while th actual crime is about 2%.

In 2010/11 the pattern remais same but the percentage lower. in car crime 18% individuals preceived the danger of crime but in actual 4% car crime. The prceived bulgary percentage is more than actula crime which was 2%. it decreases from 2009/10. And the violent crime preceived 13% but this crime in actual about 3%.So the graph say that the percentage of actual crime less than the preceived crime. Both crimes reduces in 2010/11.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify the chart’s central contrast: perceived risk is much higher than actual victimisation, and car crime has the highest figures. However, some key details are inaccurate or unclear. For example, you give perceived violent crime as 10% in 2009/10, whereas the chart shows about 15.5%; you also report actual car crime as 4% rather than about 4.5%. Your overview says both perceived and actual figures fell in the second year, but actual rates rose slightly for burglary and violent crime and stayed level for car crime. The response covers the three crime types and both periods, but the overview and comparisons need more accurate reporting and clearer selection of the main trends.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a basic structure: an introduction, an overview, and separate discussion of the two years. This gives the reader a general route through the information. However, progression is weakened by repeated points, especially the final statement that actual crime was lower than perceived crime, which has already been established. Some links are unclear or mechanical, such as “In addition” and “So the graph say,” and the comparison between years is not consistently developed. Grouping the figures by crime type, or making the year-to-year changes explicit within each category, would create a clearer progression. Check that each sentence connects logically to the one before it and that pronouns such as “this crime” have an unmistakable reference.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use relevant topic vocabulary, including “percentage,” “actual,” “risk,” and “victims,” so the reader can generally understand the subject. However, the range is limited and several spelling and word-choice errors make the report less clear, including “bulgary,” “preceived,” “actula,” and “beome.” Some phrases are also unnatural, such as “the actual car crime” and “the percentage of actual crime.” Use precise chart language such as “the proportion who perceived a risk” and “the actual victimisation rate.” Avoid repeating “crime” in every clause, and proofread spelling carefully, since these errors are noticeable and occasionally slow the reader’s understanding.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

Most sentences use simple structures, and you attempt some longer comparisons, but grammatical control is inconsistent. Examples include “it clear taht greatly people overestimated,” which is missing a verb and has an incorrect word order, and “the pattern remais same,” which needs an article and a verb form. There are also problems with tense and sentence boundaries, as in “the actual figure is 2%” within a past-period description and “about 3%.So.” These errors recur and sometimes make relationships between figures difficult to follow. Practise accurate comparative sentences, for example, “The perceived figure fell from 21% to 17%, while the actual rate remained at about 4.5%,” and check articles, verb forms, 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.