Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-14

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 6.0)

The first table shows changes in the overall population of New York City from 1800 to 2000. Additionally, the second and third table illustrate changes in the population of the five districts of New York City- Manhattan,Brooklyn,Bronx,Queens and Staten Island over the same period. Overall, the population of New York City increased significantly between 1800 and 2000, While Manhattan initially hd the vast majority of residents it's share fell notably over the period, and by 2000 most of the people resided in other four districts.

To begin with, in 1800 the overall population of New York City recorded was 79,216. Manhattan being the dominant district as 60,515 residents lived there, making up 76% of New York City's population, While only 24% of the residents lived in other four states.However, in 1900 New York City's population rose to 3,437,202. The total population of Manhattan increased to 1,850,096, while its share fell to 54%. Conversely, the population of the other four districts icreased to 1,587,109 their share in population also increased to 46%.

Furthermore, in 2000 the overall population of New York City surged to 8,009,185. Moreover, the population of Manhattan fell dramatically to 1,538,096 and thus its share was reduced to 19%. On the other hand, the population of other four districts stood up at 6,471,089 and hence their share rose to 81%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You cover the main stages and provide a clear overview: the city’s population grew substantially, while Manhattan’s share fell and the other districts became dominant by 2000. Most figures are accurately reported, including the overall totals and the 2000 figures. There is one factual slip: Manhattan’s 1900 population was 1,850,093, not 1,850,096. Also, “other four states” is inaccurate because these are districts, not states. The comparison of Manhattan and the combined other districts is relevant, though the response could explain the overall pattern more precisely—for example, Manhattan’s population rose to 1900 before declining, while the other districts continued to grow. This gives the report solid coverage, with some details needing greater precision and development.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response is arranged in a sensible sequence: an introduction and overview are followed by paragraphs covering 1800–1900 and 2000. This makes the main comparisons easy to follow, and linking expressions such as “Conversely” and “On the other hand” help signal contrasts. However, some connections feel mechanical or are not quite suited to the relationship being described. “Furthermore” and “Moreover” add little, while “However” introduces the 1900 figures without clearly identifying the contrast. Punctuation and spacing also interrupt the flow in places, such as “states.However” and the inconsistent spacing around “population.” To strengthen progression, use fewer, more precise transitions and connect the figures directly to the trend being discussed.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of vocabulary for describing change, including “increased significantly,” “rose,” “fell dramatically,” “surged,” and “share.” These choices help communicate the broad trends and show some variety. At times, however, word choice or collocation is imprecise: “stood up at” is not natural for a population figure, and “other four states” mislabels the districts. “Recorded was” is also awkward, and “dominant district” is less precise than describing Manhattan as having the largest population or share. There are spelling slips, including “hd” and “icreased.” Aim for accurate, conventional reporting language and check spelling carefully; this would make the vocabulary more precise without requiring more elaborate wording.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex structures, including a contrast clause in the overview and sentences beginning “while” and “although”-type comparisons. The meaning is generally clear, but some grammatical and punctuation errors remain. For example, “Manhattan being the dominant district as 60,515 residents lived there” is a fragment rather than a complete sentence, and “While” is incorrectly capitalised after a comma in the overview and first body paragraph. The sentence “the population of the other four districts increased to 1,587,109 their share…” joins two clauses without suitable punctuation or a conjunction. There are also missing spaces after full stops and inconsistent comma use. Build complex sentences around complete clauses, and proofread sentence boundaries and punctuation.

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.