Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 4.5 · 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 4.5)

The bar graph illustrates the observed hazard and real likelihood of being a victim of crime.

Initially, the bar graph compares a victim of crime various types the regarded 2009\10 the car crime in burglary was rise above 15%. Next, its growing sharply in car crime more then 20%. After that, its gose decreased in violent crime on less 15%. The second, increased crime was recognised has 2010\11 in burglary started at around less 15%. Then its increased darametically in car crime in above 15%. Similarly, that was remain static in violent crime.

In contrast, the burglary actual commence in 2009\10 its inisiate on above 0. While, in car crime on above 0%. Whereas, in car crime that's on less 5%. Finally, its going downward subsequently on less 5%. The last and final Actial 2010\11 in burglary its also same as 2009\10 as like less 5%. its also took a highest growth, in car crime on above 0%. However, its gose down gradually in violent crime on less 5%.

overall, the victim of crime acording to precentage

the highest reso of crime about car crime or voilent crime. And the lowest crime rate in burglary.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

You identify the chart’s subject and make a relevant broad comparison by noting that car crime is highest and burglary lowest. However, the account only minimally reports the data: it does not clearly explain that perceived risk is much higher than actual victimisation across all three crime types, or compare the two years accurately and systematically. Some statements are unclear or misleading, such as saying car crime “in burglary was rise above 15%” and describing violent crime as decreasing, although perceived violent crime rises slightly from about 15.5% to 13.5% only if comparing the correct years—and actual violent crime increases. To improve, give a clear overview of the main contrasts, then report approximate figures for each crime type and distinguish perceived from actual likelihood.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.5

There is an attempt to organise the response into sections, and phrases such as “In contrast” and “overall” show an effort to guide the reader. However, the information does not progress clearly: perceived figures and actual figures are mixed with unclear sequences, and the reader cannot reliably tell which year or series each statement describes. Connectors such as “Initially,” “Next,” “After that,” and “Finally” create a list-like sequence rather than meaningful comparisons. The final overview is separated and incomplete, so it does not effectively summarise the preceding details. Group the response into an overview and two clear comparison paragraphs, and use explicit references such as “perceived figures in 2009/10” and “actual figures in 2010/11.”

Lexical Resource: Band 4.5

The response uses some task-related vocabulary, including “bar graph,” “likelihood,” “burglary,” “car crime,” and “violent crime,” so the topic is recognisable. However, the range is basic and repetitive, and frequent inaccurate word choices or spelling errors strain understanding. Examples include “observed hazard” for perceived risk, “gose decreased,” “darametically,” “Actial,” and “reso.” Phrases such as “highest growth” also do not accurately describe the chart, which compares percentages rather than growth. Build a reliable set of chart vocabulary—“perceived likelihood,” “actual rate,” “rose slightly,” “remained stable,” and “was considerably higher”—and check spelling and collocations before submitting.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

You attempt to describe changes and make comparisons, but the response relies on a very limited range of sentence patterns, and frequent grammatical errors sometimes distort the intended meaning. For example, “the bar graph compares a victim of crime various types” lacks a clear grammatical structure, while “its gose decreased in violent crime” has problems with the verb form and sentence construction. Tense and agreement are also inconsistent, as in “that was remain static,” and several clauses are joined or punctuated in ways that make their relationships unclear. Practise writing complete subject–verb sentences with accurate past-tense verbs, for example, “Perceived concern about car crime fell from about 21% to 17%.”

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.