Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-13

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 tabular charts depict the information about the variation in the total population of new york city from 1800 until 2000, while other charts show the data of population changes in five district of the city over given period.

In the general overview, the population of new york city was significantly inclined over a decade. The highest proportion of total population could be noticed in brooklyn, queens, bronx and staten island.

It is evident from the chart that around 79,216 total population were in 1800 in new york city, which were upsurged to 8,009,185 over two decades. Moreover, total populace in manthattan were 60,515 in 1800 and increased to 1,850,093 in 1900, but after a decade , the population was decline by 3,11,997.

The average proportion of total population in manhattan in 1800 was 76% , whilst it was decrease to 19% in 2000.

Probing ahead, total residents in brooklyn, bonx , queens and staten island were around 18,701 in 1800 , which goes more than 6 lakhs in 2000. As the total citizens were lessen in 1800, its percentage also reamined at 24%. The percentile of total masses in four districts increased gradually over the decades.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You cover the main subject and include relevant figures, notably the city’s rise from 79,216 in 1800 to 8,009,185 in 2000 and Manhattan’s changing share. Your overview also identifies the shift toward the other four districts. However, some key details are inaccurate or unclear: the city’s population rose over two centuries, not “over a decade”; the other districts had 6,471,089 people in 2000, not “more than 6 lakhs”; and Manhattan’s population fell from 1,850,093 in 1900 to 1,538,096 in 2000, rather than declining “after a decade.” The overview’s claim that the other districts had the highest proportion needs a clearer comparison across the years. More precise reporting and fuller coverage of the 1900–2000 changes would strengthen the response.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, an overview, and two paragraphs presenting details. Sequencing the city total before the district figures is sensible, and phrases such as “Moreover” and “Probing ahead” attempt to connect information. However, progression is not always clear because the comparisons move between years without consistently identifying the time span; for example, “after a decade” obscures the 100-year interval from 1900 to 2000. Some links are mechanical or do not express the relationship precisely, as in “As the total citizens were lessen in 1800.” Group the figures by a clear comparison—overall growth, then Manhattan versus the other districts—and use straightforward transitions that accurately signal contrast or change.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You attempt a range of vocabulary, including “variation,” “proportion,” “increased,” and “gradually,” and the topic is generally understandable. However, several choices are inaccurate, unnatural, or too informal for a data summary: “significantly inclined” for population growth, “upsurged,” “total populace,” and “total masses.” There are also spelling errors in district names, including “manthattan” and “bonx,” which reduce precision. “More than 6 lakhs” is not an appropriate way to report the table’s figure in this context and is also numerically inaccurate. Prefer standard, precise terms such as “rose,” “population,” “share,” and “residents,” and check spelling of all place names and numerical expressions.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You use both simple statements and longer clauses, including a sentence contrasting Manhattan’s rise and subsequent fall. However, control of sentence structure and verb forms is inconsistent. For example, “the population was decline” needs a past-tense form, while “it was decrease to 19%” has an incorrect verb construction. Agreement is also problematic in “79,216 total population were” and “total residents … were around 18,701,” where the subject and phrasing do not fit the number. Punctuation spacing is uneven, and some long sentences would be clearer if divided or carefully joined. Practise accurate past-tense reporting and subject–verb agreement, then proofread each sentence for a complete, correctly formed clause.

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.