Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.5 · 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 5.5)
The given tabular charts illustrate the total number of individuals in New York city whether the proportion in other cities such as Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens, Staten Island and Manhattan as well, from 1800 to 2000. The data has been calibrated in percentage.
Having a myopic look on the tables it is evident that, In 1800, total population of the New York city were 79,216. However, the percentile were 60,515 in Manhattan as accounted for 76% whereas the figure were 18,701 in other districts as comprised for 24%. After that, the proportion of people lived in Manhattan were 8% more than other five regions in 1900, while the entire population of New York were almost 3,437,202 in the same year.
further delving into the information, the whole community were around 8,009,185 in New York City in the year 2000. Along with it, the inhabitants ratio declined to 19% in Manhattan and remained around 1,538,096 merely. Likewise, the citizens of other five neighbourhoods were 6,471,089 as represented for 81%.
To sum up, it can be vividly manifested that New York City had majority of population in the year 2000. The citizens of other districts were more in 2000 as compared to Manhattan.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 6.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.5 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.5 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5
The response covers the main features of the data, including the total population growth and the shift in distribution between Manhattan and the other districts. However, the analysis is somewhat inconsistent. For instance, the introduction incorrectly refers to the other districts as 'other cities' rather than boroughs. While the key trends are identified, the comparison between 1800 and 2000 is clear, but the description of the 1900 data is slightly confusing in its phrasing. The overview is present but could be more effectively integrated to highlight the significant demographic shift from Manhattan-centric to a more distributed population across the other boroughs.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.0
The essay is organized into logical paragraphs, with an introduction, body paragraphs for specific time periods, and a summary. Cohesive devices are used, such as 'However,' 'After that,' and 'To sum up,' though some transitions feel slightly mechanical or forced. The progression of ideas is generally clear, but the referencing is occasionally imprecise, such as the phrase 'whether the proportion in other cities' in the introduction, which does not clearly link to the rest of the sentence. Paragraphing is used appropriately to separate the chronological data points.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.5
The vocabulary is adequate for the task but shows some inaccuracies in word choice and collocation. Phrases like 'myopic look' are inappropriate for an academic report, and 'percentile' is used incorrectly to refer to raw numbers or percentages. The term 'inhabitants ratio' is also non-standard. While the student attempts to use a range of vocabulary, the misuse of these terms occasionally hinders precision. More precise terminology, such as 'demographic distribution' or 'proportionate share,' would improve the quality of the response.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5
The response contains a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. There are several grammatical errors, particularly with subject-verb agreement (e.g., 'total population... were 79,216' and 'the figure were 18,701'). Additionally, there are issues with preposition usage and awkward phrasing, such as 'as accounted for 76%' and 'as represented for 81%.' While these errors do not completely impede communication, they occur frequently enough to impact the overall fluency and accuracy of the writing. A greater focus on basic grammatical agreement and correct prepositional phrases is needed.
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.