Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-16

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 illustrations give information about the total percentage of the populaton in a New York City and also mentioned which district contributed how much to its population. Overall, the total numbers of population increased with the passage of years. In case of Manhattan district its percentage decreased from 76% to 19% and other four districts ratio increased from 24% to 81% of total population between the year 1800 and 2000.

It is quite evident from the given first table which showed the relationship of year and total numbers of population in New York City including all five districts. From the given figure it was clearly revealed that populations were increased with the passage of years like population was 79,216 in 1800, 3,437,202 in 1900 and 8,009,185 in 2000.

Meanwhile in all five districts Manhattan was the only which had highest numbers of population and its contribution was 76% in 1800, 54% in 1900 and 19% in 2000. it was clear from the second table its contibution was significantly decreased. The others four districts were also in major contribution of the total population in a New York City. They had a 24% of total population in 1800 and almost doulble of this ratio in 1900. They showed the highest percentage of 81% of total population of 6,471,089 in 2000.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You identify the main overall pattern: New York City’s population rose substantially, while Manhattan’s share fell and the other districts’ combined share increased. The figures for the city total and the percentages at the three dates are accurate, and you include the important reversal in the districts’ relative contribution. This covers the task well, though some comparisons are less fully developed: for example, Manhattan’s population itself rose from 60,515 to 1,850,093 by 1900 before falling to 1,538,096 in 2000, a key contrast with its declining percentage that you do not report. The other districts’ population figures for 1800 and 1900 are also omitted. Including these would make the account more complete and precise.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, with an opening overview followed by paragraphs about the total population and district shares. The sequence from 1800 to 2000 is generally easy to follow, and transitions such as “Overall” and “Meanwhile” help signal shifts. However, progression is not consistently clear: the opening says the illustrations show the “total percentage,” although the first table gives population totals, and the final paragraph moves between Manhattan’s share, the other districts’ share, and their population without a clear comparison structure. Some linking is repetitive or mechanical, particularly repeated references to “the given table” and “it was clear.” Organising the details by year or by district, and using clearer references, would strengthen cohesion.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use enough topic vocabulary to communicate the main trends, including “contribution,” “percentage,” “increased,” and “decreased.” However, the range is limited and several choices are inaccurate or unnatural, which makes parts of the report less precise. For instance, “total percentage of the population” mislabels the city totals, while “numbers of population” and “other four districts ratio” are awkward collocations. “Almost double of this ratio” is also unclear because the 1900 share is 46%, rather than exactly double 24%. Spelling errors such as “populaton,” “contibution,” and “doulble” further affect control. Aim for precise terms such as “population,” “share,” and “combined population,” and check spelling carefully.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt both simple and more complex sentences, and the main information is usually understandable. Some grammatical errors remain, however, particularly in articles, agreement, and sentence construction. For example, “in a New York City” uses an unnecessary article, and “the only which had highest numbers” is missing a suitable noun phrase and article. In “the first table which showed,” the tense is inconsistent with describing the table’s present content; “shows” would be more appropriate. Capitalisation after full stops is also inconsistent, as in “2000. it was clear.” These issues do not generally prevent the reader from understanding the trends, but more reliable sentence patterns and careful proofreading would improve accuracy.

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.