Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 4.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-27

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 below graph shows the percentage of perceived and actual victim of crime in different years

In the comparison between 2009 and 2010 perceived crime for burglary was 15 percent and the actual crime was nearly 2 percent perceived crime for burglary was little reduced and reacged to 9 petcent in the same tear perceived car crime was high as compare to actual There was also a voilent crime its perceived ratio was very high it reaches to 15 percent snd gradually decreaed to between 12 to 13 percentin these years Actual crime ratio was on lowe side

In year 2010 to 20211perceived ratio for burglary was on top as compate to car and voilent

crime The actual ratio was between 5 to 10 percent

In conclusion we ca say that perceived crime ratio was very high in all year as compare to actual likelihood of being a victim of crime

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.0

You identify the broad comparison that perceived risk was higher than actual victimisation, and you mention burglary and violent crime. However, the response reports several figures inaccurately: burglary perception fell to about 13%, not 9%, and the actual rates were around 2–4.5%, not 5–10%. It also omits the key pattern that car crime had the highest perceived likelihood in both periods, while actual rates changed only slightly. The overview is too general to summarise the main features, and the year labels are unclear. The response is 143 words, below the 150-word minimum; this limits how fully the task is addressed. Select the main comparisons accurately and support them with a few clear figures.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.5

There is a basic attempt to organise the response into an opening, two body paragraphs and a conclusion. The final sentence also gives a broad overall comparison. However, progression is difficult to follow because the first body paragraph moves between burglary, car crime and violent crime without clearly separating the categories or periods. Phrases such as “in the comparison between 2009 and 2010” and “in year 2010 to 20211” make the time sequence unclear, while the second paragraph introduces a claim about burglary being “on top” that conflicts with the chart. Linking is limited, and several ideas run together in long sentences. Group the information by year or by perceived versus actual likelihood, and use clear transitions and punctuation to guide the reader.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

The response uses some relevant task vocabulary, including “perceived,” “actual,” “percentage,” “ratio” and “likelihood,” so the topic is generally recognisable. However, the range is limited and several expressions are imprecise or unnatural, such as “actual victim of crime,” “on lowe side” and “perceived crime was high as compare to actual.” Repetition of “ratio” and “crime” also makes the description less precise. Spelling errors, including “voilent,” “decreaed” and “reacged,” are noticeable and sometimes slow the reader. Use standard chart language such as “the perceived likelihood of burglary” and “the actual rate,” and check spelling carefully. More accurate collocations would make the comparisons clearer without requiring unusually advanced vocabulary.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.5

You attempt both simple statements and longer sentences, and the conclusion communicates a basic comparison. However, sentence structure and punctuation are often weak, making relationships between ideas difficult to follow. For example, “perceived crime for burglary was 15 percent and the actual crime was nearly 2 percent perceived crime for burglary was little reduced” joins several clauses without appropriate punctuation or a clear connector. There are also problems with articles, agreement and tense, as in “There was also a voilent crime its perceived ratio was very high” and “it reaches to 15 percent.” The range of structures is limited, and errors recur across the response. Build shorter, complete sentences first, then add controlled comparisons using forms such as “while” and “whereas,” with consistent past-tense reporting.

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.