Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-26

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 compares the proportion of real possibility to be a victim, and percieved danger of some types of crimes.

Overall, it is clearly shown that actual crime proportion is much lower than percieved danger in every year, and every types of crime. Additionally, car crime proportion is on top in every year.

In year 2009 and 2010,for both percieved danger and actual crime, car crime is on top. Almost 20% of people thought they are gonna be a victim of this crime, and nearly 5% of them actually was a victim of this. The proprtion for burglary and violent crime was similar. The percentage of percieved danger for both of them were nearly 50%. Though actual crime for violent crime was a bit higher than burglary.

In year 2010 and 2011, car crime is also on top here. more than 16% of people felt percieved danger, and approximately 5% of them were victim really. Violent and burglary crime ration were both less than 5%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify the main contrast accurately: perceived risk is much higher than actual victimisation, and car crime has the highest figures in both periods. You also make relevant comparisons between the crime types. However, some key details are inaccurate or unclear. For example, perceived burglary and violent crime were around 13–15.5%, not “nearly 50%”; this substantially misrepresents the scale. The response also groups the years as “2009 and 2010” and “2010 and 2011,” rather than clearly identifying the two periods, 2009/10 and 2010/11. Include a concise overview and report the main changes more precisely, such as the general fall in perceived risk and the slight rise in actual rates.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, an overview and separate paragraphs for the two periods. This helps the reader follow the broad comparison. However, progression within the body paragraphs is limited: figures are listed without a consistent pattern for comparing perceived and actual rates across all three crimes. Some linking is also awkward or repetitive, particularly the repeated statement that car crime “is on top.” References such as “this crime” and “them” are not always precise, and the year groupings are confusing. Organise each period in a consistent order, and use clear comparisons to connect the figures rather than relying on repeated phrases.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use some relevant task vocabulary, including “proportion,” “percentage,” “actual” and “perceived danger,” so the topic is generally understandable. However, the range is limited and several word choices or collocations are inaccurate, such as “real possibility to be a victim,” “car crime is on top,” and “victim really.” These expressions make the description less natural and sometimes obscure the intended meaning. There are also spelling errors, including “percieved” and “proprtion,” and “ration” where “rate” or “proportion” is intended. Build a more precise set of chart-description phrases, such as “the perceived likelihood of victimisation,” “recorded actual rates,” and “was the highest.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mixture of simple statements and longer sentences, and the overall meaning can usually be followed. However, errors occur frequently in sentence construction, agreement, tense and punctuation. For instance, “every types of crime” has incorrect agreement, while “nearly 5% of them actually was a victim” has an incorrect verb form and an unclear subject. The opening phrase “In year 2009 and 2010,for both…” also needs an article and clearer punctuation. Some sentences are fragments or awkwardly joined, as in “Though actual crime for violent crime was a bit higher than burglary.” Practise accurate comparative sentence patterns and check subject–verb agreement, articles and sentence boundaries.

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.