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)

In the first table are given information about the growing population of the all five districts of New York City. This table shows that in year 1800 population was 79,216, In year 1900 it increased to 3,437,202 and in year 2000 it was 8,009,185.

In Second table there is data of Manhattan District, yearly-wise population and also the percentage of population it is contributing into all the five districts. In year 1800, population of Manhattan was 60,515, it is the 76% of the total population. After sometime in 1900s, population increased to 1,850,093, it was only 54% of the total population and Finally in year 2000 the population rised to 1,538,096 and it was only 19% of total population. In Hundred years from 1900 to 2000 Manhattan population increased very slowly.

Last and third table is showing us the data of remaining 4 districts of the New York City. In this data we have 18,701 population in year 1800 which contributes in only 24% of total population. After 100 years in 1900 the data shows an increase in population as the numbers get to 1,587,109 and these numbers are 47% of the total population. The last data shows us gradually increase in population as numbers rise to 6,471,089 and it contributes to 81% of population.

This shows us that how the other four districts ( Brooklyn, Bronx Queens, Staten Island) surpassed Manhattan in the last two centuries.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You report the main population figures and identify the key shift: Manhattan’s share fell while the other four districts became dominant. The final comparison that the other districts “surpassed Manhattan” is a relevant overview, and most figures are accurate. However, the overview is brief and comes only at the end, while the response mainly lists data rather than clearly summarising the overall pattern. There is also a factual inconsistency: the other districts’ share in 1900 is 46%, not 47%. The statement that Manhattan’s population “increased very slowly” from 1900 to 2000 is inaccurate, since it actually fell from 1,850,093 to 1,538,096. Make the overview explicit and distinguish population totals from percentage shares.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a clear basic structure: it moves from the citywide total to Manhattan, then to the other districts, and ends with a comparison. This makes the information generally easy to follow. Time markers such as “In year 1800,” “After 100 years,” and “Finally” help signal sequence. However, the repeated openings “In the first table,” “In Second table,” and “Last and third table” make the organisation feel mechanical, and the final comparison would work better as an overview near the beginning. Some references are also unclear: “these numbers” refers to the population figure, but the sentence then discusses its percentage. Grouping the main trends by comparison, rather than describing each table in turn, would create stronger progression.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use enough topic vocabulary to communicate the data, including “population,” “percentage,” “total,” “increased,” and “surpassed.” The final use of “surpassed” is particularly effective for describing the change in relative prominence. However, vocabulary is repetitive, especially “data,” “numbers,” and “population,” and several phrases are awkward or imprecise, such as “contributing into all the five districts” and “the data shows us gradually increase.” “Rised” is also an incorrect word form; use “rose.” Aim for more precise reporting language, such as “accounted for,” “represented,” and “declined,” while avoiding repeated references to the tables themselves. These changes would make the description more natural and exact.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt both simple and more extended sentences, and the reader can generally understand the comparisons. However, some grammatical errors recur in sentence construction, articles, and verb forms. For example, “In the first table are given information” has an incorrect passive structure; write “The first table gives information.” In “In year 1800 population was,” articles are missing, and “the population rised” uses an incorrect verb form. The sentence beginning “After sometime in 1900s” also has an unclear time construction. Punctuation and capitalisation are inconsistent, as in “In year 1900 it increased…, In year 2000…”. Use a wider range of controlled sentence patterns and check articles, tense, and sentence boundaries 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.