Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-09-13
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 initial table illustrates how the population of New York City changed from 1800 to 2000, while other tables showed how the population of the different five districts changed over the same operiod.
Overall, the population of all the the five districts significantly increased over the period.The Manhattan occupied the largest percentage of the total population at the start and decreased over end of the period. While individuals and pertcentage of other four districts gradually increased over the end of the periods.
The Manhattan had 60,515 poulation in 1800 with a 76% which ends at a 19% in 2000, while number of individuals increased till 1,538,096 in 2000. The all other four districts had fewer individuals at the start which was 18,701 in 1800 with a 24% of total population. The number of population increased to 6,471,089 till 2000 and percentage gradullay increased to 81%. However, the Manhattan and other four districts showed a minor flucations in 1900.The Manhattan had 1,850,093 population in 1900 with a 54%, while other districts had 1,587,109 members with a 46% in 1900.
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 all parts of the prompt by looking at the total population changes and comparing Manhattan with the other four districts over the 1800-2000 period. The candidate identifies key trends, such as the dramatic growth across all districts and the shifting proportions of Manhattan versus the other boroughs. However, the data reporting contains some inaccuracies and confusion regarding percentages and exact figures (for instance, the phrasing around the 1900 fluctuation is slightly muddled). While the main features are successfully reported, the support and data selection lack complete precision. Therefore, the response aligns best with Band 6.0.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5
The response is organized into an introduction, an overview, and body paragraphs, providing a coherent overall arrangement. However, the progression is sometimes hindered by mechanical cohesive devices and awkward transitions, such as 'While individuals and pertcentage of other four districts gradually increased over the end of the periods.' Paragraphing is attempted, but sentence-level cohesion is occasionally faulty, with repetitive phrasing ('The Manhattan had...', 'The all other four districts had...') and unclear referencing. These issues place the response firmly at Band 5.5, as the logical flow is disrupted by structural awkwardness.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The vocabulary used is adequate for the task, with attempts at less common items like 'percentage', 'individuals', and 'fluctuations'. However, there are noticeable lexical errors, awkward word choices, and spelling mistakes throughout the text, such as 'operiod' for period, 'pertcentage' for percentage, and 'poulation' for population. Phrasing like 'members' to describe districts is unnatural. The range is minimally adequate to convey the basic data, but frequent lexical inaccuracies restrict the score to Band 5.0.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0
The response exhibits a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, demonstrating some attempt at subordinate clauses ('while number of individuals increased'). However, grammatical accuracy is weak, with frequent errors in articles ('the Manhattan', 'the all other four districts'), verb tenses ('showed' mixed inappropriately with present/past references), and prepositional usage. Punctuation and sentence structures occasionally impede smooth reading, as seen in run-on phrasing and missing subjects. These persistent errors reflect Band 5.0 characteristics.
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.