Band 4.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 4.0 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-21

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 4.0)

first of all a graph that show below helps us to understand the situation or anything that collecter want to analyze from ourself. Here the black dots show the percieved crime rate in 2009 to 2010. therefore these graphs help us to imagine the given condition so bt analyzing this condition we assume the crime percieved rate . In the next column that show a tilt lines it is the actual crime rate. This is also the in the year 2009 to 2010 . Here we are able to assume by the first column of graph that show violent and speedy crosss to about 15th point.

The fifth one column is the most extra nd huge level rate of crime and these dots also show the perceived and likely reach to about th 20th points in 2009 to 2010.

Here the Car arime rate is the almost huge from all the crimes and the other two crimes is likely same to eah other i.e the Bulglary and the Violent crime. The tilted lines show the very very moderate rate of crime and all of its column are under 5th points. There is also a crime rate is very on trend in our country and thats very bad for all countrys .

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.0

The response identifies some relevant features, including that car crime has the highest perceived rate and that actual rates are below 5%. It also notes that burglary and violent crime are relatively similar. However, the task is addressed only minimally: there is no clear overview of the main pattern across both years, and several descriptions are vague or inaccurate. For example, “violent and speedy” is unclear, and the claim that the fifth column is the highest does not identify the crime type or compare the two years. The response also focuses on interpreting the chart rather than systematically summarising it. To improve, state the main contrasts clearly, then report selected figures for each crime type and note that perceived rates fell while actual rates changed only slightly.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 3.5

There is a basic attempt to move through the chart, using phrases such as “first of all,” “In the next column,” and “Here.” The response also groups some comments around perceived and actual rates. However, the ideas are not arranged in a clear, coherent progression: the discussion shifts between chart features, crime types, and a general comment about crime in the country. References such as “the fifth one column” and “these dots” make it difficult to know which data are being described. Paragraphing does not help distinguish an overview from supporting comparisons. Organise the response into a brief overview followed by comparisons of the crime types and years, and use clear labels rather than relying on column positions.

Lexical Resource: Band 4.0

The response uses a small set of relevant terms, including “perceived,” “actual crime rate,” “violent crime,” and “Burglary.” This shows some awareness of the chart’s subject. However, vocabulary is basic and often repetitive, while inaccurate or unclear choices strain understanding. Phrases such as “speedy,” “very very moderate,” “most extra nd huge level rate,” and “likely reach” do not express the data precisely. There are also spelling errors, including “percieved,” “Bulglary,” and “arime.” Use standard chart language and accurate crime labels, and choose terms that describe comparisons rather than general impressions. For example, “highest perceived proportion” is clearer and more appropriate than “huge level rate.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

The writer attempts both simple statements and longer sentences, for example, “Here the Car arime rate is the almost huge from all the crimes and the other two crimes is likely same to eah other.” However, sentence structures are often incomplete or poorly controlled, and errors in agreement and articles recur: “a graph that show,” “the other two crimes is,” and “the actual crime rate” after a plural reference. Tense and sentence boundaries are also inconsistent, as in “therefore these graphs help us to imagine … so bt analyzing.” These problems sometimes make the intended comparison hard to follow. Practise building clear subject–verb sentences, checking singular and plural agreement, and separating each comparison into a complete sentence.

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.