Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-11
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 First table illustrates the distinction in overall population of New York CIty from 1800 to 2000.The second and third table demonstrates the changes in population of five districts of city over same time period.Overall, the number of inhabitants are highest in year 2000 and lowest in 1800.While district Manhattan contributes largest in total population and was highest in year 1800 and lowest in year 2000.While other districts were opposite in stats as they contributes least in year 1800 and highest in 2000.
New York City consist of 79,216 inhabitants in year 1800, followed by 3,437,202 inhabitants in year 1900, and their was a greatest surge in population with the 8,009,185 numbers of inhabitants in year 2000.
Considering the district Manhattan it contributes 76 percent in population while other districts contribute only 24 percent in year 1800.Followed by year 1900 in which Manhattan contributes 54 percent in overall population and other districts consist of 46 percent of overall inhabitants.Moreover, in year 2000 Manhattan was just at 19 percent and other districts contribute 81 percent in overall population.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 6.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.5 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5
The response covers the main stages and gives the overall population figures accurately: 79,216 in 1800, 3,437,202 in 1900 and 8,009,185 in 2000. It also identifies the key shift in the district shares, from Manhattan’s 76% to 19% and the other districts’ 24% to 81%. This gives a relevant overview and addresses the tables. However, the overview says Manhattan “contributes largest in total population” without limiting this to 1800; in 1900 it still had the larger share, but by 2000 the other districts were much larger. The district discussion reports percentages but omits their population totals, and the description of the overall rise could be more precise about the scale of change. More selective detail and a clearer comparison would strengthen the report.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5
The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction and overview, a paragraph on the city total, and a final paragraph comparing district shares. The sequence from 1800 through 1900 to 2000 is generally easy to follow. However, progression within the paragraphs is sometimes mechanical, with repeated “in year” and “followed by,” and the opening overview uses several “while” clauses in a way that makes the relationships less clear. The final paragraph is essentially a list of percentages rather than a developed comparison, and there is little linking between the city-wide growth and the changing district distribution. Use clearer topic sentences and a small range of precise links such as “by contrast” or “whereas” to make the comparisons flow more naturally.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.5
The response uses relevant vocabulary for describing population data, including “inhabitants,” “overall population,” “contributes,” and “greatest surge.” These choices show an attempt to vary language beyond simply repeating “population.” However, several expressions are inaccurate or unnatural for this task: “distinction in overall population” does not clearly mean change, “consist of” is awkward for describing a population share, and “opposite in stats” is informal and vague. Repetition of “contributes” and “overall” also limits flexibility. Aim for precise collocations commonly used in data reports, such as “the population rose,” “accounted for,” and “the remaining districts.” This would make the comparisons clearer and more appropriately formal.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0
There are attempts to combine ideas using clauses and time references, and the main figures remain understandable. However, control is uneven, with errors in agreement, articles, verb forms and sentence boundaries. For example, “the number of inhabitants are” should use a singular verb, while “New York City consist” needs a past-tense form. “Their was” is also incorrect, and the opening contains run-on sentences where a full stop and space are needed. Some sentence patterns, particularly the repeated “in year” constructions, are not consistently controlled. Practise producing accurate simple sentences first, then add subordinate clauses for comparisons. Check subject–verb agreement, past-tense reporting, articles before “year,” and punctuation when editing.
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.