Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · 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 5.5)

The three tables illustrated the demographic change in population in new york city and its five districts(Manhattan,Brooklyn,Bronx,Queens,State Island)during the time period of 1800 to 2000.

overall , the population in New York increased significantly in two centiuries. while Manhattan rose highly initially then decline substantially over the period of time, whereas the other four districts face significant growth in the same time.

in 1800, New York had just 79,2216 residants over there but it rose to 3,437,202 residends in 1900 before doubling to 8 millions in 2000.

Manhattan , was the dominant district in 1800, with 60,515 proportion of 76% increased in 1900 to [redacted phone] then dropped to 19% by the end of the time.

Comparatively, the other districts (Brooklyn,Bronx,Queens,Staten Island) climbed to 18701 residants in 1800 to [redacted phone] which shows the rising proportion in 1900 among all districts ,whereas this figure countinuesly increased to 81% in 2000 which is the heighest number amont the states

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You identify the main overall pattern: New York’s population grew substantially, Manhattan’s share fell, and the other districts’ share rose. You also include relevant figures for 1800 and 1900, and the 2000 share of the other districts. However, some key details are incomplete or inaccurate: the city’s 1800 population is written as “79,2216” rather than 79,216, and the 2000 total is rounded to “8 millions” without reporting the district populations. The Manhattan figure for 1900 is also written unclearly as “18500093”; the correct value is 1,850,093. The overview’s claim that Manhattan “rose highly initially then decline[d]” needs clearer support, especially its fall in population from 1900 to 2000. Select and report the main figures more precisely.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, an overview, and paragraphs covering the city total and district groups. This gives the reader a broad route through the information. However, progression within the paragraphs is sometimes unclear, particularly in the final paragraph, where the figures for 1800, 1900 and 2000 run together and the relationship between population and percentage is not consistently explained. Linking words such as “whereas” and “Comparatively” are attempted, but some connections are awkward or do not clearly signal the comparison. Improve cohesion by grouping the data by year or by district, and use separate sentences to distinguish population totals from shares. Clearer punctuation and paragraph transitions would make the comparisons easier to follow.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some relevant vocabulary for describing data, including “population,” “proportion,” “increased,” “dropped,” and “significant growth.” These choices show awareness of the task’s subject. However, the range is limited and several word choices or spellings reduce precision: “residants/residends,” “countinuesly,” and “heighest” are inaccurate, while “rose highly” and “figure countinuesly increased to 81%” are unnatural or imprecise. “States” is also not the right term for New York’s districts. Aim for accurate data-reporting collocations such as “population rose,” “accounted for,” and “share increased,” and check spelling carefully. More precise vocabulary would help distinguish a change in population from a change in percentage share.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex sentence forms, including a contrast with “whereas” and a time sequence using “before.” Some sentences communicate the intended trend, but grammatical control is uneven. For example, “the other four districts face significant growth” shifts tense from the past-time context, and “Manhattan, was the dominant district” has an unnecessary comma between the subject and verb. The sentence beginning “Manhattan” also lacks a clear grammatical structure around its figures, while the final sentence joins several comparisons without clear clause boundaries. Use consistent past tense for the historical data, build complete clauses around each comparison, and punctuate them clearly. These changes would make the range of structures easier to understand.

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.