Band 7.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 7.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-03

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 7.0)

The provided tables illustrates the total population of New York City distributed among its five districts, Manhattan and the other four (Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens, Staten Island) between 1800 to 2000.

Overall, New York City has experienced a massive demographic expansion over the two centuries. While Manhattan initially accounted for its vast majority of the city residents, its dominance diminished substantially over time as the other four districts became the primary drivers of growth. In 1800, the total population of New York was 79,216 out of which 60,515 or 76% was residing in Manhattan making it the residential hub of the city. By contrast, the remaining four district had population of only 18,701, representing the rest 24%.

Between 1800 and 1900, the overall population surged exponentially to approximately 3.44 million. Manhattan's population grew dramatically to 1,850,093; however, its relative share dropped to 54%. Concurrently, other two boroughs saw their combined numbers climb to 1,587,109, expanding their collective share to 46%.

By 2000, New York City reached to a total population of over 8 million. During its final century, Manhattan experienced a slight contraction in absolute numbers of 1,538,096, which reduced to its proportion to 19%. Conversely, the outlying boroughs experienced tremendous growth, reaches 6,471,089 residents and dominating the city's composItion at 81%

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

The response covers all parts of the task well, providing an overview of the main trends alongside specific data points for both Manhattan and the other four districts across the three given years. The information is accurately reported from the visual data, and the comparisons between Manhattan and the combined outlying boroughs are clear. Ideas are well supported with figures such as population counts and percentages. However, there is a slight tendency to over-generalise or lean on broad groupings rather than breaking down all individual districts separately, which places the response securely at this level. To reach a higher standard, the writer could provide a slightly more granular overview of the individual outlying boroughs where the data permits, ensuring every notable shift is fully explored.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The response displays a clear logical organisation and progression throughout. Information is grouped chronologically and by geographic focus, making the text easy to follow. Cohesive devices are used flexibly and appropriately to connect ideas, such as 'While Manhattan initially accounted', 'By contrast', and 'Conversely'. Paragraphing is managed effectively, with each paragraph serving a distinct role in introducing, developing, or summarising the data. Referencing is generally clear, though occasional transitional links could be smoother. To achieve an even higher band, the writer could ensure that every cohesive transition feels entirely natural and avoids any slightly mechanical phrasing when contrasting periods.

Lexical Resource: Band 7.0

The writer uses a sufficient range of vocabulary with some flexibility and precision, successfully employing less common items such as 'demographic expansion', 'residential hub', 'surged exponentially', and 'contraction'. There is a clear attempt to use varied terminology to describe trends and proportions. However, there are a few minor lexical inaccuracies or awkward word choices, such as 'reaches 6,471,089 residents' instead of 'reaching' and a minor typo with 'composItion'. These occasional slips prevent the response from achieving a higher band. To improve, the writer should focus on precise word forms and tighter control over collocations.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.5

The response demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, incorporating relative clauses, passive constructions, and varied introductory clauses. There are frequent error-free sentences, showing good overall control of grammar. However, a few persistent errors remain, such as 'The provided tables illustrates' (subject-verb agreement error), 'the remaining four district' (missing plural), 'other two boroughs' (missing article), and 'reduced to its proportion' (awkward prepositional usage). Because these errors occur alongside a good variety of complex structures and do not impede communication, the response meets the requirements of this band well, though ironing out these minor slip-ups is necessary to progress further.

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.