Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-12

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 GIVEN TABLES ILLUSTRATE INFORMATION ABOUT CHANGES IN NEW YORK CITY, AS WELL AS IN IT'S FIVE DISTRICT MANHATTAN, BROOKLYN, BRONX, QUEENS, STATEN ISLAND - FROM 1800 TO 2000.

THE FIRST TABLE SHOW POPULATION CHANGES IN NEW YOURE INCLUDING ALL FIVE DISTRICTS. IN 1800, THE NUMBER OF POPULATION OF NEW YORK ARE 79,219. HOWEVER, BY 1900, THIS FIGURE HAS INCREADED REAPIDLY TO 3,437,202. THEN IN 2000, NUMBER OF RESIDENTS INCREASED TO 8,009,185.

THE SECOND TABLE SHOW CHANGE IN NUMBER OF POPULATION ACROSS MANHATTAN AND ALSO PROVIDE A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL POPULATION OF NEW YORK. IN 1800, THE TOTAL POPULATION IN MANHATTAN WAS 60,515 THAT'S 76% OF TOTAL POPULATION OF NEW YORK CITY. FORTHERMORE BY 1900, THIS FIGURE HAS INCREASED 1,850,093 THAT 54% OF TOTAL POPULATION. AND IN 2000, THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE DECREASED TO 1,538,096 THAT 19% OF TOTAL POPULATION. THAT MEANS IN 1800 AND 1900 MORE THAN 50% POPULATION OF NEW YORK CITY LIVED IN MANHATTAN.

THE THIRD TABLE SHOW CHANGES OF POPULTION IN OTHER FOURE DISTRICTS BROOKLYN, BRONX, QUEENS, STATEN ISLAND. FROM 1800 TO 2000. IN 1800, 24% OF TOTAL POPULATION LIVED IN OTHER FOURE DISTRICTS. FORTHEMORE BY 1900, THERE WERE 46% OF TOTAL POPULATION LIVED IN OTEHR FOURE AREA OF THE NEW YORK CITY. AND IN 2000, ALMOST 81% OF POPULTAION LIVED IN OTHER DISTRICS.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You report the main overall rise in New York City’s population and identify the key shift in where residents lived: Manhattan’s share fell while the other four districts’ share grew. The figures for 1900 and 2000 are generally accurate, but the 1800 city total is given as 79,219 rather than 79,216. The response also omits the population figures for the other districts, so their substantial growth is conveyed only through percentages. There is no concise overview clearly drawing together the two main trends; instead, the response mainly describes each table in turn. To strengthen the report, add an overview and compare the districts’ actual populations as well as their shares.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response is arranged in a clear sequence, with separate paragraphs for the city total, Manhattan, and the other districts. This makes the source of most information easy to follow, and linking expressions such as “However,” “Furthermore,” and “Then” help signal changes over time. The organisation is coherent overall, but the progression is somewhat mechanical because each paragraph repeats a year-by-year pattern and there is no distinct overview to establish the main comparisons first. Some links also connect ideas awkwardly, particularly “That means” before the conclusion about Manhattan. A stronger structure would begin with a brief overview, then group the district figures to highlight the contrast between Manhattan and the other four areas.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some relevant vocabulary for describing data, including “population,” “percentage,” “increased,” and “decreased,” so the main trends can be understood. However, the range is limited and several word-choice, collocation, and spelling errors are noticeable, such as “number of population,” “increaded reapidly,” “other foure area,” and “popultaion.” These errors make parts of the report less fluent and occasionally require the reader to work out the intended wording. Aim for standard data-reporting phrases and check spelling carefully. For example, use “population” or “number of residents” rather than “number of population,” and “the remaining four districts” rather than “other foure area.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

Most sentences communicate a basic comparison, and you attempt to combine information using clauses and time references. However, the range of sentence structures is limited, and errors occur frequently enough to affect fluency. Examples include “The first table show,” “the number of population … are,” and “this figure has increased 1,850,093,” where subject–verb agreement or sentence construction is faulty. Several clauses also lack a clear grammatical connection, as in “that 54% of total population.” Use a consistent past tense for the historical data and practise complete comparison sentences, such as “By 1900, Manhattan’s population had risen to …, representing 54% of the city total.”

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.