Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-11-02

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 below depicts the perceived danger and actual likelihood of being a victim of crime

The graph shows a person being a victim of crime in different categories. Basically, there are three types of crime being committed. Three types of crime are burglary, car crime and violent crime. We need to keep in mind that graph shows the data from the year 2009 to 2011.

We'll start from the year 2009/10, where we can perceived the peak of car crime compare to other crimes and the actual likelihood of being a victim of car crime is highest.

We can notice that the other crimes in the table have the similar data to each other of being perceived but violent crimes comes second of being an actual victim of crime.

However, in the year 2010/11 we can see drastic changes in all categories of crime. There is a decrease in perceived of being a victim of crime but still the car crime tops the chart and other crimes have similar data to each other. Car crime is still the highest and second comes violent crime in being an actual victim of crime.

Overall there is a decrease in car crimes where we can notice an actual increase in other crimes.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

You identify the three crime types and make relevant comparisons, including that car crime has the highest perceived and actual figures in both periods. However, the response only partially reports the chart’s main features: it gives no figures, and the overview is unclear and partly inaccurate. Perceived risk fell for all three crimes, while actual likelihood rose slightly for burglary and violent crime and stayed level for car crime. The final claim that there is an “actual increase in other crimes” is too broad, since car crime did not increase. Also, “violent crimes comes second” is not consistently accurate: burglary and violent crime are close, and their order differs by measure. Select key comparisons and support them with approximate values.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0

The response has a basic structure: it introduces the topic, discusses 2009/10, then 2010/11, and ends with an overall statement. This gives the reader some organisation. However, progression is limited because several points are repeated, particularly that car crime is highest and the other categories are similar. Linking phrases such as “We'll start from” and “However” do not always clarify the relationship between the information, and “Overall” introduces a conclusion that does not accurately summarise the trends. Paragraphing is also limited, with the discussion presented as a sequence of short statements rather than clearly grouped comparisons. Organise the body around perceived versus actual figures, and use concise links to show changes between years.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use relevant topic vocabulary, including “perceived,” “actual likelihood,” “burglary,” and “violent crime,” so the reader can follow the general subject. However, the range is limited and several phrases are repetitive or imprecise, such as “being a victim of crime,” “other crimes have similar data,” and “tops the chart.” Some word combinations are unnatural, including “peak of car crime” and “an actual increase in other crimes,” which makes the intended comparison less precise. Use vocabulary suited to describing chart data, such as “proportion,” “figure,” “remained stable,” and “declined,” while distinguishing perceived risk from actual victimisation. Avoid repeating the same phrase when a precise alternative is available.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response uses mostly simple sentence patterns, with a few attempts to combine ideas using clauses, as in “where we can notice a drastic changes.” These attempts are often faulty, and frequent errors sometimes make the comparisons difficult to interpret. Examples include “we can perceived,” “the other crimes … have the similar data,” and “violent crimes comes second,” which show problems with verb forms, articles, agreement, and number. The opening also lacks a full stop, and the final sentence is not clearly constructed. Practise accurate present-tense reporting and subject–verb agreement, and build longer sentences only when the grammatical relationships are clear. For example, contrast the two years in a controlled sentence.

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.