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 first chart gives the information about changes in New York population in different three years whereas second and third tables depict the information about population changes in Manhattan and other four districts in same years.
Overall, it is clearly seen that the all tables show increased trend in over time period.
In 1800, the citizens in New York were 79,216, however, the residents in New York were 3,43,202 in 1900. In 2000, the total population was 8,009,185.
In second table, in 1800 the citizens 76% in Manhattan as a 60,515 population. 54% as percent population in numbers were 1,850,093 in 1900. After, in 2000, total population were 1,538,096 in percentage were only 19%.
In different four districts was residents numbers 18,701 as proportion of 24% in 1800. Afterwards, in 1900, the population in percentage was 46% and in numbers were 1,587,109. In 2000, the numbers of citizens were 6,471,089 whereas the proportion were 81%.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5
The response covers the main features of the data, including the overall growth in population and the shifting proportions between Manhattan and the other four districts. However, the reporting of data is inconsistent and at times confusing. For instance, the description of the second table is difficult to follow due to awkward phrasing and unclear data presentation (e.g., '54% as percent population in numbers were 1,850,093'). While the main trends are identified, the lack of clarity in presenting the figures prevents a higher score. The overview is present but could be more precise regarding the specific trends observed across the different time periods.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5
The response is organized into paragraphs, which helps the reader follow the structure. However, the use of cohesive devices is often mechanical or inaccurate. Phrases like 'After, in 2000' and 'In different four districts was residents numbers' disrupt the flow of information. The logical progression between sentences is sometimes weak, making it difficult to track the comparison between the districts over the three time periods. While the overall arrangement is coherent enough to be understood, the lack of sophisticated linking words and the repetitive sentence structures limit the effectiveness of the writing.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The vocabulary is limited and repetitive, relying heavily on basic terms like 'numbers', 'population', and 'citizens'. There are noticeable errors in word choice and collocation, such as 'increased trend in over time period' and 'in different four districts was residents numbers'. These errors occasionally cause the reader to pause to decipher the intended meaning. To improve, you should focus on using more precise terminology for describing data, such as 'proportion', 'accounted for', 'witnessed', or 'fluctuated', and ensure that nouns and verbs are used in the correct grammatical context.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0
The response relies on a limited range of simple sentence structures. There are frequent grammatical errors, particularly with subject-verb agreement (e.g., 'total population were 1,538,096') and article usage (e.g., 'In second table'). The phrasing 'the proportion were 81%' is also grammatically incorrect. While the meaning is generally clear, these persistent errors in basic grammar and the lack of complex sentence structures prevent the response from reaching a higher band. Focusing on sentence variety and ensuring subject-verb agreement would significantly improve the quality of the writing.
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.