Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-11-09

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The first table below shows changes in the total population of New York City from 1800 to 2000. The second and third tables show changes in the population of the five districts of the city (Manhattan, Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens, Staten Island) over the same period.

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

Student answer (Band 6.0)

The first table illustrates the population in New York city from 1800 to 2000 and other two tables depicts the population percentage in districts namely- Manhattan, Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens and Staten Island in the year 1800 to 2000.

Overall, population in New York city accounting of all five districts was increased, while, the most was from Manhattan districts in the year 1800 and 1900, but in 2000 the population of Manhattan was decreased and increased in the other districts.

In detail, population of New York city in 1800 was accounted at 79,216, by the next two given year it was drastically rose nearly to 8 million. In Manhattan district the population size in the year 1800 was at 60,515 and recorded of 76 percent from the total population, while this figure was reduced in term of percentage by roughly 20 percent in each year, but the population was increased by 1 million approximately in 1900 and fell around 0.2 million in 2000.

Furthermore, other districts (Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens and Staten Island) had total 18,701 population and 24 in percent, while the population gradually taking upward movement by the 1 million and 22 percent in 1900 and 4 million and 35 percent in 2000 respectively.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You identify the main overall change: New York’s population grew substantially, while Manhattan’s share fell and the other districts’ share rose. You also include relevant figures for 1800 and describe Manhattan’s peak in 1900 followed by a decline. However, some key data are inaccurate or unclear. The city’s population rose to about 3.4 million in 1900 and 8 million in 2000, not “nearly to 8 million” across the two later years. The other districts reached 1.59 million in 1900 and 6.47 million in 2000; describing these as increases of “1 million” and “4 million” understates the figures. The overview also says Manhattan had the most population in 1800 and 1900, but does not clearly distinguish its falling absolute population after 1900 from its changing share.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a clear four-paragraph structure, moving from an introduction and overview to details about Manhattan and then the other districts. This gives the reader a generally logical route through the information, and transitions such as “Overall,” “In detail,” and “Furthermore” help signal the stages. To make the progression more precise, organise comparisons consistently by year or by population versus percentage. For example, the final paragraph combines population increases and percentage-point changes in a way that makes “1 million and 22 percent” difficult to interpret. Some linking is also mechanical, particularly repeated use of “while.” Clearer references to the figures and more explicit comparisons between the two groups would make cohesion smoother and less ambiguous.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use a reasonable range of task-related vocabulary, including “population,” “districts,” “percentage,” “reduced,” and “drastically,” and the reader can generally understand the intended trends. However, several word choices and collocations are inaccurate or unnatural, which limits precision. “Population percentage in districts” is less clear than “the districts’ shares of the total population,” while “accounted at” and “taking upward movement” do not express the data naturally. “The most was from Manhattan districts” is also vague. Aim for standard reporting language and distinguish carefully between a population figure and a percentage share. More precise verbs such as “rose,” “fell,” “accounted for,” and “represented” would help communicate comparisons accurately.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex sentences, including clauses linked with “while” and “but,” and the overall meaning is usually recoverable. However, some grammatical errors recur in agreement, verb forms, articles, and sentence construction. For example, “other two tables depicts” needs subject–verb agreement, and “it was drastically rose” combines incompatible verb forms. In “population … was increased,” the passive construction is not appropriate for describing a numerical trend; use “increased” or “rose.” The sentence beginning “while this figure was reduced…” also has an unclear reference and an awkwardly joined contrast. Check singular and plural subjects, use consistent past-tense forms, and divide long sentences when the relationships between ideas become difficult to follow.

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.