Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-09-18

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 6.0)

The first table displays the number of resident increased in the New York City between 1800 to 2000, While the second and third tables give information about the total percentage of people lived in Manhattan and other of the four districts of the city (Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens, Staten Island) during

same era.

Overall, it is clear that the population of New York has increased signifcantly during these two centuries. Initially, a large portion of people were living in Manhattan which later started migrating to other districts.

In New York city, the total population of city across all districts was 79216, but it grew to 3,437,202 by the end of 1900. This number continued to rise in later years and reached to 8,009,185 in 2000.

In 1800, 76% of total population was living in Manhattan city and remaining 24% were residing in other districts. Followed by 1900, the people in Manhattan decreased to 54% and other district accounted for 46%. In 2000, the residents of Manhattan city were of at lowest only 19% of total and other districts showed a sharp surge making it 81%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.5

The response successfully covers all parts of the task by reporting the main features of the population changes in New York City and its five districts between 1800 and 2000. An overview is presented, highlighting the overall growth and the demographic shift from Manhattan to other districts. Key data points, such as the overall population figures and the percentage shifts (e.g., Manhattan dropping from 76% to 19%), are correctly cited and compared. However, there are minor factual inaccuracies or awkward phrasings regarding specific labels (such as referring to 'Manhattan city'). Nevertheless, the main trends are adequately captured and supported with relevant data from the tables, earning a solid Band 7.0 for this criterion.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.5

The text exhibits a clear logical organisation with a recognizable introduction, an overall summary paragraph, and body paragraphs dedicated to specific data sets. Cohesive devices are used to guide the reader through the data, as seen with transitional phrases like 'Overall, it is clear that' and 'In 1800... In 2000...'. Paragraphing is used appropriately to separate different aspects of the visual data. However, some referencing is slightly clunky or repetitive, such as 'other district accounted for 46%' and 'other districts showed a sharp surge'. Overall progression is maintained throughout, fitting the Band 7.0 descriptor well.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

The student attempts a range of vocabulary suitable for an academic task, incorporating terms such as 'resident', 'migrating', 'percentage', and 'surge'. However, there are notable lexical errors and awkward word choices, such as 'the number of resident increased' (grammatical form error combined with lexical choice), misspelling 'signifcantly', and referring to Manhattan as 'Manhattan city'. Less common lexical items are attempted but lack precision or natural collocation. Because these errors do not impede communication but restrict flexibility, the vocabulary performance aligns with Band 6.0.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

The response features a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, demonstrating attempts at relative clauses and temporal prepositional phrases. There are, however, several grammatical errors throughout the text. Examples include 'the number of resident increased' (incorrect pluralization/part of speech), 'people lived' instead of 'people living', and 'were of at lowest only 19%'. Punctuation and article usage are also shaky in places (e.g., missing articles before district names). While these errors do not fully obscure the meaning, they are frequent enough to prevent the score from reaching Band 6.5 or higher, placing it firmly at Band 6.0.

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.