Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-11-04

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 demonstrated the perceived and actual likelihood of a victim of crime in three different crime burglary, car crime and violent crime. Overall, it can be clear seen that the car crime for both perceived and actual showed the highest figure. While, the burglary and violent crime both displayed almost constant value of percentage.

To begin with, the perceived 2009/10 for burglary crime and violent crime also show 16 %. On the other hand, for car crime rose slightly at 21%. Furthermore, the actual 2009/10 on a graph showed only 2% in burglary but in car crime at 4%. and for violent crime stay back to at 3%.

Moreover, the perceived 2010/11 the percentage of burglary and violent crime almost constant value of percentage at 13% and for car crime it increased and at 17%. in addition, the actual 2010/11 for burglary and violent crime also represented almost stable value of percentage at 3% and 4%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You identify the chart’s subject and make a relevant overall comparison: car crime has the highest figures, while the actual rates are much lower than perceived rates. You also report several key values, including perceived burglary and violent crime at about 16% in 2009/10 and perceived car crime at 21%. However, the overview is not fully accurate: the burglary and violent-crime figures do not remain constant across the years, and perceived rates generally fall rather than rise. The 2010/11 actual figures are also misreported: burglary is about 2.5%, violent crime 3.5%, and car crime 4.5%. A clearer summary of the overall gap between perception and reality, alongside accurate year-to-year comparisons, would make the response more complete.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure, moving from an introduction and overview to details for 2009/10 and then 2010/11. This gives the reader a basic route through the information. However, some links are mechanical or awkward, such as “To begin with,” “Furthermore,” and “Moreover,” and punctuation sometimes disrupts the flow: “4%. and for violent crime…” begins a new sentence incorrectly. The overview also groups burglary and violent crime together without clearly explaining how their figures change. Improve progression by organising comparisons around perceived versus actual likelihood, or by comparing each crime across the two years, and use linking phrases only where they clarify the relationship between figures.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant chart vocabulary, including “perceived,” “actual,” “percentage,” and “figure,” so the topic is generally clear. There is also some attempt to vary wording with “displayed” and “represented.” However, several phrases are imprecise or unnatural, such as “likelihood of a victim,” “showed the highest figure,” and “stay back to at 3%.” Repetition of “value of percentage” also limits the range and makes comparisons less precise. Choose standard data-reporting collocations and use crime categories directly—for example, “the perceived likelihood of victimisation” or “the rate for burglary.” More accurate phrasing would help you describe rises, falls, and differences without relying on vague expressions.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex sentences, including contrast with “On the other hand” and clauses beginning “While.” However, some sentence structures are incomplete or incorrectly formed, as in “While, the burglary and violent crime both displayed…” and “for car crime rose slightly.” Verb forms and agreement also need attention: “the perceived 2009/10 … show” should use a past-tense verb, while “the actual 2009/10 … showed only 2% in burglary” needs a clearer grammatical construction. Punctuation and capitalisation are inconsistent, particularly after “4%.” and before “in addition.” Practise complete comparison sentences with consistent past-tense reporting verbs; this will make your meaning clearer and improve control of the structures you are already attempting.

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.