Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-22

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 bar graph illustrates a comparison between perceived and actual likelihood of being a victime of crime. The filter category is selected by crime type. There are 3 type of crimes in the graph; burglary, car crime and the violent crime.

The graph clearly gives us the information that, for the burglary, the ratio of perceived was 16% and the actual number was 2% in 2009/10. While if we can see the numbers for perceived and actual in 2010/11, are 8% and 3% respectively.

Let's talk about the other crime that is the car crime. In 2009/10, the figures are 21% for perceived and 4% for actual. However, there is a slightly down in 2010/11. The percentages are 17% and 3% for perceived and actual respectively.

The last one is the violent crime and the percentage for that is almost same as the burglary except the one minor change and that is in 2009/10 the actual percentage of being a victim of crime is 3% that is only 1% up as compare to burglary. Rest of the values are same in the chart.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

You identify all three crime types and make relevant comparisons between perceived and actual risk, including the high perceived figure for car crime and the much lower actual figures. However, several key details are inaccurate: burglary perception in 2010/11 is reported as 8% rather than about 13%, and actual car crime in that year is given as 3% rather than about 4.5%. The violent-crime figures are also not “same” as burglary across the chart: perceived risk is about 15.5% and 13.5%, while actual risk is about 3% and 3.5%. There is no clear overview of the main pattern, such as perceived risk being consistently far higher than actual risk. More accurate reporting and a concise overview would make the response more complete.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a generally understandable arrangement: it introduces the chart, then discusses burglary, car crime and violent crime in separate paragraphs. This gives the reader a clear route through the categories, and phrases such as “However” help signal a comparison. At times, though, the progression feels like a list rather than a synthesis of the main patterns. The opening does not provide an overview, and the final paragraph ends with “Rest of the values are same in the chart,” which is unclear and does not effectively conclude the summary. Use a brief overview after the introduction, then group comparisons where possible, and make references such as “these figures” explicit.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant task vocabulary, including “perceived,” “actual,” “percentage” and the crime categories, so the topic is generally clear. However, the range is limited and some choices are inaccurate or unnatural, such as “the filter category,” “the ratio of perceived,” and “there is a slightly down.” “Victime” is also misspelled, and “actual number” is less precise than “actual likelihood” or “actual rate.” These issues make parts of the description awkward, although the intended meaning is usually recoverable. Build a more precise set of chart-description phrases and check spelling and collocations; for example, describe figures as “stood at” a percentage or say that a figure “declined slightly.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt some longer structures, including “While if we can see the numbers…” and “except the one minor change,” but these are not controlled successfully. Several sentences have problems with sentence structure, agreement or articles: “There are 3 type of crimes” should be “There are three types of crime,” while “the figures … are 21% … and 4%” needs clearer parallel phrasing. The sentence beginning “While if” is a fragment, and “the percentage for that is almost same” is missing an article. These errors sometimes make the relationships between figures harder to follow. Practise accurate simple comparison sentences first, then add subordinate clauses, checking that each sentence has a complete main clause and consistent grammatical forms.

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.