Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-20

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 6.5)

The tables illustrate how the total population of New York City and its five districts (Manhattan, Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens, Staten Island) changed over the 200-year period.

Overall, New York City population has grown substantially throughout the period while Manhattan initially accounted for the majority of the population but in dominance declined when other districts saw rapid growth.

In 1800, the city total population was under 80.000 and over the next century the numbers increased drastically. The population had soared to almost 3.43 million in 1900. in the next century, population increased more than doubled and reached nearly 8 million.

Regarding population distribution, Manhattan was the most populous district among all the other and accounted for the 76% of the city's population.Growth continued over the next century in the all districts resulting in the most balanced distribution. So in 1900, the total population of Manhattan and other districts was 54% and 46% respectively. However by 2000, the opposite trends had emerged. The population of all the other districts surged to 6.5 million and accounted for the 81% of the city's total population.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

The response addresses the main features and gives a clear overview: the city grew substantially, while Manhattan’s share fell as the other districts expanded. The figures reported are broadly accurate, including the total reaching nearly 8 million and the shift from 54%/46% in 1900 to 19%/81% in 2000. The comparison across the three dates is relevant and supported with data. However, some details are generalised: the 1800 total is described as “under 80.000” rather than giving the table’s figure, and the 1900-to-2000 increase is not quantified precisely. Also, “Manhattan was the most populous district among all the other” is unclear because the table compares Manhattan with the other districts collectively, not each district individually. More precise reporting would strengthen an otherwise well-focused summary.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The response is organised into an introduction, an overview and two detail sections, with a clear progression from total population to its distribution. Linking expressions such as “Overall,” “Regarding population distribution,” and “However by 2000” help guide the reader through the comparisons. The contrast between Manhattan’s declining share and the other districts’ growth is easy to follow. Some cohesion is less controlled: “Growth continued over the next century in the all districts” does not clearly explain the change in distribution, and “So in 1900” is a slightly mechanical transition. The final paragraph also combines several comparisons in a dense sequence. Clarifying the relationship between each sentence and using more precise referencing would make the progression smoother.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.5

There is an adequate range for describing population change, including “grown substantially,” “soared,” “surged,” and “accounted for,” which gives the report some flexibility and avoids excessive repetition. The vocabulary is generally understandable, but several choices or collocations are imprecise: “in dominance declined” is not natural, “the most balanced distribution” overstates the 1900 figures, and “the most populous district among all the other” misrepresents the comparison. There are also presentation slips such as “80.000” and missing spacing after a full stop. To move beyond adequate range, choose more precise terms for shares and comparisons, and check that stronger verbs and phrases fit the data exactly.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

The response uses a mix of simple and more complex forms, including the contrastive clause “while Manhattan initially accounted for the majority …” and the time sequence “Over the next century … in the next century.” Meaning is generally clear, but some grammatical errors remain. For example, “New York City population has grown” needs a possessive or article (“New York City’s population”), while “in dominance declined” has an incomplete construction. “Growth continued … in the all districts” contains an unnecessary article, and “accounted for the 76%” uses an article where none is needed. Capitalisation after the full stop in “1900. in the next century” also needs correction. Review articles, sentence boundaries and clause construction to 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.