Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-05
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 5.0)
The First table depicts thethe changes un the total population of New York City from 1800 to 2000. The second and third table demonstrate the changes in the population of the five districts of the city (Manhattan, Brookyln, Bronx, Queens, Staten Island) over the same period.
Where we can see the first table shows the year and population of New York City. Starting form the year 1800. In 1800 the total pop Was 79,216 in 1900 the population rapidly increased upto 3,437,202 and in the last year 2000 the population was approximately 8,009,185 . So, the first table shows the change in NYC.
The second table represents the the population and its % within 3 centuries of Manhattan. In 1800 the population was 60,515 which was 76% of total population. In 1900 the population was 1,850,093 which was 54%. It grows widely according to year 1800. In 2000 the population falls and becomes 1,538,096 which was 19% of total population in Manhattan.
The third table deliver the other 4 remaining districts such as Brooklyn, Bronx,Queens,Staten Island. In 1800 the population of the 4 remaining country was 18,701 which was 24%. In 1900 the population was 1,587,109 which was 46%. In 2000 the population lifts upto 6,471,089 which was 81% of total population. In comparison 2000 was the year with the most population.
Overall, the table represents the total population of New York City. The Manhattan district had more population than other 4 districts in 1800 and 1900 but in 2000 other 4 districts had more population than the Manhattan.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5
The response attempts to address the prompt by reporting data from the tables, presenting an overview at the end and some key features such as population growth in New York City and the shift between Manhattan and the other districts. However, the development is limited and mechanical. Certain details are repetitive or merely list figures without sufficient comparative analysis. For instance, the transition from Manhattan to the other districts is noted, but the data is partially under-developed in terms of integrated comparison across the century-long spans. To reach a higher band, the writer needs to fully extend and synthesise the data points rather than relying on a sequential, district-by-district narration that lacks deeper analytical insight.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0
The response has some basic organisation, dividing the text into an introduction, body paragraphs for each table, and a concluding overview. However, there is no clear overall progression; the progression feels disjointed due to awkward transitional phrases like 'Where we can see' and 'The third table deliver'. Cohesive devices are often used inaccurately or repetitively, such as starting multiple paragraphs with similar structures. Paragraphing is attempted, but internal cohesion within sentences is frequently faulty. To improve, the writer should ensure smooth transitions between ideas, vary cohesive devices naturally, and maintain a logical flow of information without relying on mechanical references to the tables themselves.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.0
The vocabulary used is limited and barely adequate for the task, containing noticeable lexical errors and awkward phrasing such as 'total pop', 'country' instead of 'districts', and 'lifts upto'. There are also frequent spelling and word form slips like 'thethe', 'un' instead of 'in', and 'Brookyln'. The range of vocabulary is restricted, and attempts at less common lexical items often result in incorrect collocations or word choices that cause some strain for the reader. To achieve a higher level, the writer must expand their vocabulary range, employ precise synonyms for data trends, and ensure accurate spelling and word formation throughout the response.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0
The text displays a very limited range of sentence structures, relying heavily on simple clauses and repetitive patterns such as subject-verb-number constructions. When the writer attempts complex sentences, they are often faulty or awkward, as seen in relative clauses like 'which was 76% of total population'. Frequent errors occur in verb forms, prepositions, articles, and subject-verb agreement, such as 'The second and third table demonstrate' and 'population falls and becomes'. These persistent errors and limited structural variety frequently cause difficulty for the reader. Greater control over complex syntax and improved grammatical accuracy are essential for progression.
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.