Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-29
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 5.0)
The graph compares the propostion between a actual victim and a perceived victim in three types of crime in the year 2009/10 and 2010/11.
Overall, it is evident that the rate of perceived crime is the highest in the three category of crime and the car related incidents were the highest among the other categories.
In tarms of burglary, the proportion of perceived crime is the highest, at around 16% in 2009/10 and 13% in the following year, followed by actual crime rate at around 2% and 3%, respectively.
Moreover, the victims of perceived crime ralated to car incidents is around 21% in 2009/10 and 16% in 2010/11, whereas the actual crime rate was just 4%.
Crimes rate related to violance is close to burglary.
16% and 13% were perceived crime whereas 3
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 4.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5
You identify the chart’s main pattern: perceived likelihood is much higher than actual victimisation, and car crime has the highest figures. You also include several relevant percentages. However, the account is incomplete and contains inaccuracies: for burglary, actual crime is about 2% and 2.5%, not 2% and 3%; for car crime, the perceived figure in 2010/11 is about 17%, not 16%. The violent-crime comparison is left unfinished, and the response does not fully compare actual rates across all three categories or years. The overview is relevant but brief. The response is also 17 words below the required minimum, limiting the detail available. Cover all categories and complete the final comparison to address the task more fully.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0
The response has a basic structure, beginning with an introduction and overview before moving through burglary, car crime and violent crime. Linking expressions such as “Overall,” “Moreover” and “whereas” help show relationships between points. However, progression is uneven: the violent-crime paragraph is reduced to a fragment, ending with “16% and 13% were perceived crime whereas 3”, so the reader cannot follow the comparison to its conclusion. Some information is also difficult to connect because the years and actual figures are not consistently presented together. Use a clear paragraph for the overview and organise the details by crime type, giving both years’ perceived and actual figures in complete, parallel sentences.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.0
You use some task-relevant vocabulary, including “proportion,” “perceived,” “actual crime rate” and “categories,” which allows the reader to understand the general subject. However, the range is limited and several word-choice, form and spelling errors are noticeable: “propostion,” “tarm,” “ralated” and “violance.” Phrases such as “a actual victim” and “victims of perceived crime” are also imprecise for describing percentages of perceived likelihood. Repetition of “crime rate” and “perceived crime” makes the account less flexible. Aim for accurate chart language such as “the perceived likelihood of victimisation” and “the actual rate of victimisation,” and check spelling and collocations before finishing.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0
You attempt a mixture of simple and more complex sentences, including a comparison with “whereas” and an overview introduced by “Overall.” Some sentence patterns communicate the main points, but errors are frequent enough to make parts difficult to follow. For example, “the proportion of perceived crime is the highest” has an unclear grammatical relationship, while “the three category of crime” has a number-agreement problem. The final sentence is incomplete, and the phrase “16% and 13% were perceived crime whereas 3” lacks a complete comparison. Articles and sentence boundaries also need attention. Practise writing complete sentences with a consistent pattern for each crime type and year, then check agreement, articles and punctuation.
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.