Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-26

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 bargraphs compare the percentage breakdown of population of new york city from 1800 to 2000 with the population of five districts of the city (manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, staten Island) over the same period.

Overall, It is clear that manhattan was the district that covered 76% of the total population in the year 1800 while the rest four districts covered 24%. moreover, the population seems to be dropping in the manhattan district in the year 1900 as it occupies 54% of the overall population. Unlike manhattan, the other four districts population got gradually increased and it became upto 46% from 24%.

In contrast, the population of the district manhattan gradually dropped to 19% as initially it was the leading district. Meanwhile, the population of the other four (Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens, Staten Island) districts increased and it covered 81% of the total population. We can conclude that the population in manhattan decreased by 57% while incresed in the rest four districts by 57%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify the main contrast in the district shares: Manhattan’s proportion falls from 76% to 19%, while the other districts’ combined share rises from 24% to 81%. However, the response does not adequately summarise the first table, which shows New York City’s total population growing from 79,216 to 8,009,185, and it describes the figures as a “percentage breakdown” rather than clearly covering both total and district populations. The overview repeats the share changes but does not explain the key pattern that Manhattan’s population rose to 1,850,093 in 1900 before falling, while the other districts continued to grow. Also, the final claim of a 57% decrease/increase is imprecise: these are percentage-point changes in shares, not changes in population.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable opening, overview and further comparison, and the reader can follow the broad contrast between Manhattan and the other districts. However, the progression is limited because the second and third paragraphs largely repeat the same information: Manhattan’s share falls and the other districts’ share rises. Linking phrases such as “Moreover,” “Unlike,” and “In contrast” are used, but “In contrast” introduces a point already made rather than a new comparison, so cohesion feels somewhat mechanical. References such as “the rest four districts” and “it” are not always clear. Organise the report around the overall city growth, then the district figures, and avoid repeating the same trend in the overview and final paragraph.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use some relevant vocabulary for describing data, including “percentage,” “total population,” “gradually dropped,” and “increased,” so the main comparisons remain understandable. However, the range is limited and several choices are inaccurate or awkward for a table report. “The district that covered 76%” is not a natural way to describe a population share; use “accounted for” or “represented.” “Population seems to be dropping” is vague and does not distinguish a change in share from a change in the number of residents. There are also spelling and capitalisation slips, including “bargraphs,” “new york,” “staten Island,” and “incresed.” Use precise terms such as “population share,” “combined population,” and “percentage points” to make comparisons clearer.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex sentences, including clauses beginning “while” and “as,” and the overall meaning is generally recoverable. However, errors in sentence construction and agreement recur. For example, “the other four districts population got gradually increased” needs a possessive form and a more accurate verb construction, while “it became upto 46%” has an unclear subject. The sentence beginning “In contrast, the population of the district manhattan gradually dropped to 19% as initially it was the leading district” joins ideas awkwardly and needs clearer punctuation or restructuring. Capitalisation after full stops is also inconsistent (“Overall, It…”). Practise accurate comparisons and clauses, for example: “Manhattan’s share fell to 19%, whereas the other districts’ combined share rose to 81%.”

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.