Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-11-01

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 graph illustrates the proportion of the percieved threat and real likelihood of being victim of crime.

Overall, the percieved danger of car crime was on the table top, whereas actual burglary crime was seen least victim. Also, one of the striking part is that percieved crime is always more than actual crime in the period of 2009 and 2010.

The percieved car crime 2009/10 was seen at highest point securing 21. In addition, actual car crime 2009/10 was four times less than the percieved crime. similarly, percieved car crime 2010/11 was standing at second position with 18%.

Furthermore, percieved burlgary crime was standing at 15 in 2009/10 and it deccreased to 13 in 2010/11, whereas actual burlgary crime was increased marginally from 2 to 3 between 2009/10 and 2010/11. Violent perceived crime and burlgary percieved crime were observed to be at same position in those years. Actual violent crime (3%) was unchanged between the period.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify the main contrast: perceived risk is higher than actual victimisation for all three crime types, and car crime has the highest perceived figures. You also report several useful changes, including the fall in perceived burglary and the small rise in actual burglary. However, coverage is incomplete and some details are inaccurate: perceived car crime in 2010/11 is about 17%, not 18%; actual violent crime rose from about 3% to 3.5%, rather than remaining unchanged; and actual burglary rose to about 2.5%, not 3%. The overview also says actual burglary was “seen least victim,” which is unclear. Include the violent-crime comparisons and state the overall patterns more precisely.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, moving from an introduction and overview to selected comparisons, and linking expressions such as “Overall,” “Furthermore” and “whereas” help signal relationships. However, progression is uneven: the overview is difficult to interpret, and the body moves between crime types without consistently comparing both years and both measures. For example, the car-crime paragraph gives a 2009/10 comparison and then a 2010/11 perceived figure, but does not report the actual 2010/11 figure. Some linking is mechanical or awkward, as in “In addition” and “similarly.” Organise the body into clearer comparisons—perceived figures first, then actual figures—and use references that make each comparison explicit.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use some relevant task vocabulary, including “proportion,” “perceived,” “actual,” “decreased” and “marginally,” so the reader can generally understand the topic and direction of change. However, several word choices and collocations are inaccurate or unnatural: “on the table top,” “seen least victim,” “securing 21” and “standing at second position” do not describe chart data appropriately. There are also noticeable spelling errors, including “percieved,” “burlgary” and “deccreased.” Prefer precise reporting language such as “was the highest,” “accounted for,” and “fell to.” Check spelling carefully, especially for key terms repeated throughout the response.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mixture of simple and complex sentences, including a contrast clause with “whereas” and a relative clause in “one of the striking part is that…”. Meaning is usually recoverable, but errors in sentence construction and grammatical forms occur often enough to make parts awkward. Examples include “being victim of crime” (missing an article), “one of the striking part” (number agreement), and “actual burglary crime was seen least victim,” where the sentence pattern is not well formed. The sentence beginning “similarly” also needs clearer punctuation and capitalisation. Practise accurate comparative structures, for example, “Perceived car-crime risk fell from 21% to 17%, while actual risk remained at about 4.5%.”

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.