Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · 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 6.0)

The given tables provide information on changes in the total population of New York City across it's five districts from 1800 to 2000.

Overall, New York City had least population in 1800 with Manhattan leading the numbers among all the districts, and highest population in 2000 as other four districts combined, accounted for 81%.

Regarding the total population, New York City had experienced a raise in population as years passed. It had least population in 1800, from almost 79 thousands to 3.4 milllion in 1900, and accounted for about 8 million as the highest population in 2000.

In 1800, Manhattan lead the numbers with 76%, while other four districts together make up 24%. In 1900, population was faily distributed among manhattan and other four districts as Manhattan contributed about 54% and other districts combined, contributed 46%. In 2000, Manhattan had the least population as compared to other districts. Manhattan had 19% of the total population, while other four districts combined accounted for 81%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

You cover the main features and make relevant comparisons across all three years. The overview identifies the overall population peak in 2000 and the shift from Manhattan’s dominance in 1800 to the other districts’ 81% share in 2000. The figures you include are broadly accurate, including the total of about 79,000 in 1800 and 3.4 million in 1900. However, the overview’s phrase “highest population in 2000 as other four districts combined” is unclear: the city’s total population was highest then, while the other districts held the largest share. Also, the 1900 distribution is described as “fairly distributed,” but the substantial difference between 54% and 46% could be stated more precisely. Clarifying these comparisons would make the report more exact.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction, an overview, a paragraph on total population, and a paragraph comparing Manhattan with the other districts. The sequence from the broad trend to the district shares is logical, and time markers such as “In 1800,” “In 1900,” and “In 2000” help readers follow the data. This gives the report a coherent progression. To strengthen cohesion further, avoid repeating the same point in slightly different forms—for example, the overview and the final paragraph both emphasise the 2000 share of 81%. Some links between clauses are also awkward, particularly “as other four districts combined, accounted for 81%.” Use clearer sentence connections and references so the comparisons flow more naturally.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant vocabulary for describing data, including “total population,” “contributed,” “accounted for,” and “combined.” These choices make the main comparisons understandable. However, the range is limited and several word-choice or collocation errors are noticeable. “Had a raise in population” is not a natural way to describe an increase, while “lead the numbers” is imprecise for having the largest share. “Fairly distributed” also overstates how similar the 1900 proportions were. There are spelling errors in “milllion” and “faily,” and “it's” is incorrectly used for the possessive form. Aim for precise reporting verbs and check spelling and word forms carefully; this will make the description more fluent and accurate.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of sentence forms, including longer comparisons with “while” and “as,” and the main meaning is generally recoverable. However, grammatical control is inconsistent, especially in clauses with multiple parts. For example, “as other four districts combined, accounted for 81%” has an unnecessary comma and an unclear clause structure. In “other four districts together make up 24%,” the article and tense do not fit the past-time description. The phrase “Manhattan lead the numbers” also uses the wrong verb form for the past. There are further problems with possessive construction in “across it's five districts.” Practise accurate past-tense reporting and build complex comparisons with clear subjects and verbs.

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.