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 gives information on fluctuations in the overall population of New york between 1800 and 2000. The next two tables depicts variations in the population of the five districts of the city over the same period.

Overall, the population of New York in all five districts improved significantly in the given period. While Manhattan alone accounting for the increase of half the population size until 1900 and other districts expereiced a vast majority of people living by 2000 representing the most striking number of the table.

In 1800, the number of people lived in New york was just 79,216. Later in 1900, the population number jumped to 3,437,202 and kept increasing to exactly 8,009,185 by the end of period (2000).

Primarly, until 1900 Manhattan accounted for the largest number of people living amongst other districts (1,850,093), starting at just 60,5151 in 1800. Whereas, in remaining districts (Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens, Staten island) the population was only 18,701 in 800 later( slow growth 1,587,109 in 1900) sharply soared to 6,471,089 by 2000 making this most popular districts to live in, while in 2000 the population of Manhattan dipped to 1,538,097.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You cover the main changes and provide a clear overview: the city’s population rose substantially, while Manhattan’s share fell and the other districts’ share grew. The figures for the city total and most district populations are accurately reported, including the contrast between Manhattan’s 1,850,093 residents in 1900 and the other districts’ 6,471,089 in 2000. This meets the task well, with some features more fully developed than others. However, the overview’s claim that Manhattan accounted for “half the population size” is imprecise: it represented 54% in 1900, after 76% in 1800. Also, the 1800 figure is mistyped as “60,5151,” and Manhattan’s 2000 figure is given as 1,538,097 rather than 1,538,096. Clarify these details and compare the percentages explicitly to strengthen the summary.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, an overview, and paragraphs reporting the city total and district figures. The sequence from 1800 to 2000 is generally easy to follow, and “Overall” and “Whereas” signal relationships between ideas. However, some connections are awkward or unclear. The overview’s sentence beginning “While Manhattan alone…” does not form a complete, well-balanced comparison, and “Primarly” introduces a paragraph without clearly linking it to the preceding information. The final long sentence combines several dates and comparisons, making the progression harder to track. Use separate sentences for Manhattan and the other districts, and organise each comparison consistently by year or by district. This would make the overall progression clearer and reduce the need for the reader to infer relationships.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use a reasonable range of vocabulary for describing change, including “jumped,” “kept increasing,” “dipped,” and “soared,” and the meaning is usually recoverable. There are also attempts at more formal reporting language, such as “accounted for” and “representing.” However, several choices are inaccurate or unnatural for statistical data: populations do not usually “improve,” and “the most popular districts to live in” suggests preference rather than population size. “Fluctuations” is also misleading because the overall population rises at each reported point. Spelling errors such as “New york,” “expereiced,” and “Primarly” further limit precision. Choose neutral, precise terms such as “increased,” “declined,” and “accounted for a share,” and check spelling and collocations carefully.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex sentence forms, including a time clause (“While Manhattan alone…”) and a contrast introduced by “Whereas.” However, complex structures are not consistently controlled, and some errors make relationships difficult to understand. For example, “The next two tables depicts” has a subject–verb agreement error, while “While Manhattan alone accounting…” lacks a finite verb and does not complete its contrast. “The number of people lived in New York” also needs a relative clause or a different construction, such as “the number of people living in New York.” In the final paragraph, the long sentence has unclear clause boundaries and tense/structure problems. Practise building complete sentences around one main comparison, checking agreement, verb forms, and punctuation before adding subordinate clauses.

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.