Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-21

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 table illustrate the 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.

The first table shows that all five distrcts population changes over the year. First of all in the year 1800 was 79216. In the next year 1900 all districts and their polpulation was [redacted phone]. This was the overall result in the 1900. Going forward in 2000 the population was [redacted phone].

In 1800, the total population of New York City was 79,216. Of this figure, 60,515 people lived in Manhattan, accounting for 76% of the total, whereas the other districts had only 18,701 residents, or 24%. By 1900, the city's population had risen dramatically to approximately 3.4 million. Manhattan's population reached 1,850,093, representing 54% of the total, while the other districts had 1,587,109 people, making up 46%.

In 2000, the total population increased to over 8 million. However, Manhattan's population declined to 1,538,096, and its share fell to 19%. In contrast, the other districts grew to 6,471,089 residents, accounting for 81% of the total.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

The response reports the main population figures and makes the important comparison between Manhattan and the other districts. The 1800 and 2000 figures and percentages are accurate, and the shift from Manhattan’s majority share to the other districts’ 81% is clearly described. However, the opening repeats the task rather than giving an overview, and the paragraph beginning “The first table shows” is unclear: it says “all five districts population changes” but does not identify the key trend. The 1900 total is also described only as “approximately 3.4 million,” despite the exact figure being available. To strengthen the response, replace the repeated introduction with a concise overview highlighting the city’s overall growth and Manhattan’s declining share, and remove or clarify the vague preliminary paragraph.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has some useful organisation: it moves from the overall figures to district comparisons, and the final two paragraphs contrast Manhattan with the other districts across the years. Linking expressions such as “By 1900,” “However,” and “In contrast” help show time and comparison. Nevertheless, progression is weakened by the repeated introduction and by the second paragraph, which restates the totals before the more informative account begins. Phrases such as “This was the overall result in the 1900” do not connect ideas clearly, and “the first table” is followed by a claim about all five districts rather than a focused summary. A clearer overview followed by a chronological comparison would make the organisation more coherent and reduce repetition.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

The response uses relevant vocabulary for describing data, including “accounting for,” “representing,” “declined,” “share,” and “in contrast.” These choices allow the main comparisons to be understood. However, the range is uneven: “population” and “total” recur often, while some phrases are imprecise or unnatural, such as “all five districts population changes,” “in the next year 1900,” and “overall result in the 1900.” There are also spelling errors in “distrcts” and “polpulation,” which reduce accuracy. Use more precise reporting language and check spelling carefully; for example, describe the city’s population as having “increased” or “grown,” and refer to the “proportion” or “share” of residents when discussing percentages.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

There is a mix of sentence forms, including accurate complex comparisons such as “Of this figure, 60,515 people lived in Manhattan, accounting for 76% of the total, whereas the other districts had only 18,701 residents.” The later paragraphs also use past-tense reporting consistently, and most meaning remains clear. Some grammatical errors occur, especially in the opening and the second paragraph: “The table illustrate” needs subject–verb agreement, while “First of all in the year 1800 was 79216” lacks a clear subject and has faulty word order. “The first table shows that all five distrcts population changes over the year” also has an incomplete grammatical structure. Improve control by making each sentence’s subject explicit and checking agreement, articles, and sentence boundaries.

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.