Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-18

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 table illustrates population growth from 1800 to 2000 in New York city. Following tables show population growth by percentages in five districts in New York at the same time period.

Overall, it can be seen that population of New York city was skyrocketed through the years, however, Manhattan being the most dense area with majority of the people living there at the beginning of the timeline lost its dominance, over the years.

The population of New York city was almost 80000 people in 1800, it kept growing at fascinating rate, by hitting over 3.4 million people by 1900 and reaching its peak in 2000, by slightly over 8 million people.

At the beginning of the timel period Manhattan made up 76 percent of overall population by 60515 people, by 2000 its population reached at over 1.5 million people, which made up the 19 percent of overall popultion. Other districts such as Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens, Staten island consisted 24 percent of whole population by almost 19000 people in 1800, and it kept growing by reaching more than 1.5 million people by 1900, and by hitting ashtonishing almost 6.5 million people by 2000, which was 81 percent of whole New York population.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

The response identifies the main overall pattern accurately: New York’s population rose substantially, while Manhattan’s share fell as the other districts became more prominent. It also supports this with relevant figures from 1800 and 2000, and includes the city totals for all three years. This gives the report a clear, relevant overview and addresses the key comparisons. However, the account of the district figures is selective: it omits Manhattan’s 1900 population and share, and does not clearly explain that Manhattan’s population itself peaked in 1900 before declining by 2000. The phrase “reaching its peak in 2000” is accurate for the city total, but the report could distinguish this more explicitly from the district trend. More precise coverage of these changes would strengthen an otherwise well-focused summary.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction, an overview, and paragraphs covering the city total and district populations. The progression from the broad trend to supporting figures is easy to follow, and linking phrases such as “Overall,” “At the beginning,” and “by 2000” help orient the reader. This shows coherent organisation, with some effective progression. However, several sentences carry too many figures and ideas at once, particularly the final sentence, which moves from the 1800 share through both later periods. The repeated use of “by” also makes the sequencing somewhat mechanical. Separate the comparisons into shorter sentences and use clearer references to the years and groups to make the cohesion more flexible and precise.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

The vocabulary is sufficient to describe population change and comparison, with useful terms such as “overall population,” “dominance,” “consisted,” and “reaching.” The reader can understand the intended trends, but several word choices and collocations are noticeably inaccurate or too informal for a data report. For example, “was skyrocketed” is not a natural way to describe an increase, “fascinating rate” is evaluative rather than analytical, and “ashtonishing” is misspelled. There are also spelling inconsistencies in “popultion” and “timel period.” Aim for precise, neutral reporting language and check spelling carefully. Replacing expressive wording with standard trend vocabulary would make the account more controlled and appropriate to the task.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

The response attempts a range of sentence forms, including a contrast in the overview and longer sentences that combine figures with comparisons. The main meaning is generally recoverable, but grammatical control is uneven, especially in complex sentences. Examples include “population of New York city was skyrocketed,” where the verb construction is faulty, and “Manhattan made up 76 percent … by 60515 people,” where the relationship between the percentage and figure is not expressed grammatically. Articles and sentence boundaries also need attention: “Following tables show” lacks an article, while the final sentence is overloaded and difficult to control. Use simpler, accurate clauses for each year comparison, and check verb forms, articles, and punctuation before combining ideas.

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.