Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-08-06
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 5.5)
The table compares the population of New York City and its five districts in 1800, 1900 and 200.
They also show the proportion of total amount of residents in Manhattan and four other cities over the same time.
Overall, New York City increased dramatically in 2000. Although Manhattan is highly populated, its total population share declined considerably, while the combined other four cities increased and was dominant in 2000.
In 1800, New York had about 79,216. Manhattan recorded up to 60,515 with 76% share, whereas the other combined cities had just 18,701 and 24% share of total population. In 1900, New York accounted for about 3,437,202 individuals. Manhattan housed an increasing number of inhabitant of about 1.8 million and above with decrease in share of 54%, meanwhile the four other cities put together had just between 1.5 million people with the decreased shared of just 19%.
The year 2000 was a dominant year overall.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.5 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.5 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0
The response fails to address the task adequately. While it identifies the main trend of NYC population growth, it fails to report on the specific data for the five districts as requested. The summary is incomplete, particularly regarding the year 2000, where the data is not presented. The analysis of the provided tables is superficial and lacks the necessary detail to support the overview. Furthermore, the response ends abruptly, leaving the final section of the data (the breakdown of the five districts in 2000) entirely unaddressed. To improve, ensure all data points are covered and that the comparison between the districts is clearly articulated.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5
The essay is organised into paragraphs, but the progression of ideas is disjointed. The final paragraph is extremely brief and lacks a logical connection to the previous analysis. While some cohesive devices are used (e.g., 'Although', 'whereas', 'meanwhile'), they are sometimes used incorrectly or in a way that does not improve the flow of the argument. The referencing is occasionally unclear, such as the mention of 'four other cities' when the prompt refers to 'districts'. Paragraphing is present, but the structure is unbalanced, with the final paragraph failing to contribute meaningfully to the overall coherence of the response.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.5
The vocabulary is generally adequate for the task but lacks the precision required for a higher band. There are several instances of awkward phrasing and word choice errors, such as 'total amount of residents' instead of 'total number of residents' and 'decreased shared' instead of 'decreased share'. The term 'cities' is used repeatedly to refer to the districts, which is inaccurate based on the prompt. The range of vocabulary is limited, and the student relies on basic descriptors rather than more sophisticated academic terminology suitable for describing statistical trends.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5
The response contains a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, but there are frequent grammatical errors that occasionally impede clarity. Examples include 'The table compares... in 1800, 1900 and 200' (missing a zero), 'New York had about 79,216' (missing a noun like 'residents'), and 'the four other cities put together had just between 1.5 million people' (incorrect preposition usage). Subject-verb agreement and pluralisation issues are also present. While the meaning is generally understandable, the frequency of these errors prevents the response from reaching a higher band score.
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.