Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · 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 6.0)

The tables illustrates variations in the total population of New York City and its five districts (Manhattan, Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens, Staten Island) between 1800 and 2000.

Overall, the total population in all five districts of New York City increased over the period, whereas the total population of other districts exept Manhattan accounted for the largest proportion of the population in the New York City.

In the first table, the population of New York City was 79,216 in 1800. Afterwards, it increased gradually to 3,437,202 by 1900. Consquently, the population of New York City increased to 8,009,185 by 2000.

Second table indicated that the population of Manhattan district has increased from 60,515 to 1,850,093 between 1800 and 2000. Substantially, the population of this district declined steadily to 1,538,096 between 1900 and 2000. Initially in 1800, the 76% of the total population of New York City was composed by Manhattan district. Afterwards, it declined gradually to 54% by 1900, Considerably the population of Manhattan district was composing only 19% of the total population of New York City by 2000.

According to third table, in 1800 the population of other districts except Manhattan was 18,701, sequentially it climbed to 1,587,109 by 1900. Conclusively, the population rose sharply to 6,471,089 by 2000. At first, in 1800 these four districts were forming 24% of the total population of New York City, by 1900 the population in these districts increased and they were composing 46% of the total population of New York City. Finally, by 2000 the population in these four districts rose sharply and they were showing 81% of the total poulation of New York City by 2000.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You cover the main time points and report the key contrast: Manhattan’s share falls from 76% to 19%, while the other districts’ share rises from 24% to 81%. The overall population figures are also accurate, and the overview identifies the broad shift in population distribution. However, the overview’s claim that the population in all five districts increased is imprecise, since Manhattan’s population fell between 1900 and 2000. There is also a factual inconsistency in saying Manhattan rose from 60,515 to 1,850,093 “between 1800 and 2000”; that increase occurred by 1900. The response addresses the tables, but some comparisons and trends need clearer, more precise reporting to develop the summary fully.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction, an overview, and separate paragraphs for the total population, Manhattan, and the other districts. This makes the information easy to locate, and time markers such as “Initially,” “by 1900,” and “Finally” help establish chronology. However, the progression within paragraphs is sometimes mechanical, with repeated sequencing words such as “Afterwards,” “Consequently,” and “Conclusively.” Some links do not express the relationship accurately: “Substantially” introduces a decline, while “Conclusively” is used to introduce another data point. The overview also says “all five districts” increased, which weakens the connection between the summary and the later account of Manhattan’s decline. More varied, precise linking and clearer references would improve flow.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant vocabulary for describing data, including “declined,” “proportion,” “accounted for,” and “rose sharply,” so the main trends are generally understandable. However, the range is limited by repeated wording such as “population,” “increased,” and “total population,” and several less natural choices reduce precision. For example, “the population ... was composed by Manhattan district” is not an appropriate collocation, and “sequentially it climbed” is an awkward way to describe change over time. There are also spelling errors, including “exept,” “Consquently,” and “poulation.” Aim for accurate, natural trend language and check spelling carefully; this would make the description more fluent and precise.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mixture of simple and more complex sentences, including clauses with “whereas” and time expressions such as “between 1900 and 2000.” The main figures and comparisons remain understandable, but some grammatical errors recur. The opening should be “The tables illustrate,” because the subject is plural. In “the population ... has increased,” the tense is inconsistent with the completed historical period; use the past simple. Articles and sentence construction also need attention in “the 76%” and “was composed by Manhattan district.” Capitalisation after commas is inconsistent, as in “54%, Considerably.” These errors do not generally prevent understanding, but more reliable agreement, tense, article use, and punctuation are needed for stronger control.

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.