Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-19

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 maps display the survey of New York City about the total population included all five district - Manhattan, Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens and Staten Island, whereas the districts population illustrate as a percentage of total population between 1800 and 2000.

Overall, the population of New York City increased dramatically over the period, whereas the number of individuals in Manhattan districts decreased slightly. In contrast, the number of citizen in other districts rose gradually.

The population of New York City stood at 79,000 in 1800, It was 76% of total population in Manhattan district and 24% in other districts, which means 60,515 population had the Manhattan district and 18,701 in other districts. Between 1800 to 1900, the population of New York City rose from 79,000 to 3,437,202. At that time,the population accounted reduced from 76% to 54% and jumped up from 24% to 46% in Manhattan and other districts, Respectively. However, at that period the number of population in Manhattan districts had higher than the other districts.

In 2000, the population in other districts highest than the Manhattan district, whereas there were 6,471,089 and 1,538,096 population in other districts and Manhattan districts, respectively. Which made 81% of total population in other districts and 19% in Manhattan districts. The 8,00,185 numbers of citizen had the New York City in 2000.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You cover the main changes and provide a clear overview: the city’s population grew substantially, while Manhattan’s share fell and the other districts’ share rose. The comparisons for 1800, 1900 and 2000 are relevant, and most figures are accurately reported. However, the overview says Manhattan’s population “decreased slightly,” which understates the change from 1,850,093 in 1900 to 1,538,096 in 2000. The response also says the other districts rose “gradually,” although their growth was especially pronounced by 2000. The final city total is miswritten as “8,00,185” rather than 8,009,185. More precise interpretation of the population figures, alongside the percentages, would make the key features clearer and more fully developed.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a coherent overall arrangement: an introduction, an overview, and paragraphs describing the earlier and later years. This gives the reader a generally clear route through the data. Linking expressions such as “Overall,” “In contrast,” and “However” help signal comparisons, although some are used awkwardly or do not express the relationship accurately. For example, “However” introduces the 1900 comparison even though the sentence mainly adds information, and “Which made” begins an incomplete sentence in the final paragraph. Some references, such as “at that period,” are vague, and the long 1800–1900 paragraph combines several figures in a way that is difficult to follow. Use clearer sentence boundaries and more precise links between each year’s figures.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some task-relevant vocabulary, including “total population,” “accounted,” “increased dramatically,” and “percentage,” and the reader can generally identify the intended comparisons. However, the range and control of collocations are limited. Phrases such as “the survey of New York City,” “number of citizen,” “population accounted reduced,” and “had higher than” are unnatural or unclear. “Maps” is also an inaccurate label for the tables. Repetition of “population” and “districts” makes the report less flexible, while “jumped up” is too informal for this data description. Choose standard reporting language and check whether nouns and verbs combine naturally; this will improve precision without requiring unusually advanced vocabulary.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex sentence forms, including comparisons with “whereas” and clauses beginning “which means.” Some sentences communicate the data clearly, but errors in sentence construction and agreement recur. For example, “the total population included all five district” has an unclear structure and incorrect number agreement, while “the number of individuals in Manhattan districts decreased” needs a more accurate grammatical construction. The sentence beginning “Which made 81%” is a fragment, and the capitalisation and punctuation in “1800, It” and “Respectively” are inconsistent. These issues sometimes make relationships between figures harder to follow. Practise forming complete sentences around each comparison, and check subject–verb agreement, articles, plurals 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.