Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-10-30

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 chart illustrates the perceived danger and actual likelihood of being a victim of crime.

Overall, car crime perceived 2009/10 accounted for the largest percentage throughout the period, while burglary actual 2010/11 recorded for the lowest proportion. Notably, actual 2009/10 and actual 2010/11 had the lowest figure over the period.

Perceived 2009/10 had the highest percentage in burglary at 16% followed by, perceived 2010/11,actual 2010/11 and, at approximately 13%, 3% and 2%,respectively. The figure for car crime actual 2009/10 and actual 2010/11 were very similar, 4% and 3%, respectively. Moreover, car crime perceived 2009/10 dominated the figures, accounting for around 21% of total victim of crime.

In addition, at 15%, violent crime represented the largest share. Violent crime perceived 2010/11 ranked seconed, accounting for almost 13%. There was little different between violent crime actual 2009/10 and actual 2010/11, at approximately 2% and 3%, respectively.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

You identify the chart’s topic and include an overview noting that perceived risk is generally higher than actual victimisation, with car crime perceived in 2009/10 the highest. However, the overview is partly unclear: “car crime perceived 2009/10 accounted for the largest percentage throughout the period” overstates the point, since it is the highest single figure, not the largest throughout. Some figures are misreported or difficult to match to categories: for example, actual car crime in 2010/11 is about 4.5%, not 3%, and actual violent crime is about 3% and 3.5%, rather than 2% and 3%. The response also contains only 133 words, below the 150-word minimum, limiting its coverage of the comparisons. Add a clearer overview and report the main figures accurately.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, an overview, and two paragraphs describing crime categories. Linking expressions such as “Overall,” “Moreover,” and “In addition” help signal the stages of the report. However, progression within the detail paragraphs is not always clear. The sentence beginning “Perceived 2009/10 had the highest percentage in burglary” then lists several series without making the comparisons easy to follow, and the comma placement around “followed by” interrupts the flow. Some references, such as “the figures” and “the largest share,” are vague about which year or series is meant. Organise the details consistently by crime type or by perceived versus actual likelihood, and use explicit labels for each year and series.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use a suitable range of chart-reporting vocabulary, including “accounting for,” “approximately,” “represented,” and “ranked,” and the meaning is generally understandable. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “dominated the figures.” Some word choices and collocations are inaccurate or awkward, however: “car crime perceived” and “victim of crime” do not express the categories naturally, while “there was little different” uses the wrong form. “Seconed” is misspelled, and “largest share” suggests parts of a whole rather than percentages of people at risk. Use standard category labels such as “perceived risk of car crime” and “actual likelihood of victimisation,” and check spelling and collocations when editing.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple statements and more complex structures, including “while” in the overview and participle phrases such as “accounting for around 21%.” These give the report some variety, and the main message can usually be understood. However, several sentences have faulty grammatical relationships or incomplete constructions. For example, “car crime perceived 2009/10 accounted” lacks a natural noun phrase, and “Perceived 2009/10 had the highest percentage in burglary” does not clearly identify what had that percentage. The list in the burglary sentence also has confusing punctuation and an unclear structure. There are agreement and article issues in “The figure for car crime actual 2009/10 and actual 2010/11 were.” Build sentences around clear subjects, such as “The perceived figure for burglary was…,” and proofread punctuation and agreement.

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.