Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-08-14
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 5.0)
The first table gives information about how many a number of people was changed in New York City between 1800 and 2000. The second and third figures gives information about changing in the members of society of the variety districts of the city.
Overall, For the fisrt figure ,there was a highest number of population in New York City in 2000 . In the second figure, the greatest number of citizens was observed in Manhattan in 1900 and in other districts, this pointer reached a peak in 2000. In the third figure , it ranked first with 6,471,089 people in 2000.
It is clearly that there was a big difference over the period of 200 years from 1800 to 2000 for 79,216 and 8,009,185 respectively with regards to a number of people of all five districts in Manhattan. In 1900, there has been 3,437,202 individualists.
it can be seen that the lowest proportion of total population was with 19% in 2000 and the greatest percentage of all people was with 76 % in 1800. In terms of a number of people , there was 1,850,093 humans in 1900 , which are higher than other years.
As for the four different regions (Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens, State Island) , the lowest number of population was seen at 18,701 as 24% of overall, between 1800 and 1900 there were 18,701 and 1,587,109 humans .
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0
The response attempts to summarise the data but fails to clearly identify the main trends or make meaningful comparisons. The information provided is often inaccurate or confusing, such as the claim that the lowest proportion of the total population was 19% in 2000, which does not align with the provided tables. The report lacks a clear overview, and the data selection is disjointed, making it difficult for the reader to grasp the overall changes in New York City's population. To improve, focus on identifying the most significant shifts—such as the massive overall growth—and grouping the districts logically rather than listing isolated figures.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0
The response is organised into paragraphs, but the progression of ideas is often illogical. The use of cohesive devices is mechanical and sometimes inappropriate, such as 'In the third figure, it ranked first'. Referencing is frequently unclear, particularly when discussing the districts, as the reader is often left guessing which data point relates to which year or location. The transition between sentences is abrupt, and the lack of clear signposting makes the report difficult to follow. Improving the use of linking words and ensuring that each paragraph has a clear, unified focus would significantly enhance the coherence of the writing.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The vocabulary is limited and often imprecise. Phrases like 'how many a number of people was changed' and 'members of society of the variety districts' are unnatural and demonstrate a lack of control over academic register. There is also a tendency to use incorrect terminology, such as 'individualists' instead of 'individuals' or 'humans' instead of 'residents' or 'people'. While the meaning is generally conveyed, the lack of variety and the frequent word-choice errors restrict the score. Expanding your range of synonyms for population growth and distribution would be beneficial.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0
The response contains frequent grammatical errors that occasionally impede clarity. There are issues with subject-verb agreement (e.g., 'The second and third figures gives information'), article usage, and sentence structure (e.g., 'It is clearly that there was a big difference'). The range of structures is limited, consisting mostly of simple sentences with some errors in tense and prepositional phrases. While the meaning is usually understandable, the high frequency of errors prevents the response from reaching a higher band. Focusing on basic sentence construction and proofreading for subject-verb agreement would lead to immediate improvement.
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.