Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-27

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 5.0)

Three of the tables are providing information about populations of New York city's five districts. First table was depicted about the average data of populants.Another table is for Manhattan's popullation, while other is for rest of the districts.

Overall, after analysing the tables it is clear that maximum population was in 2000, whereas it was minumum in 1800 in all five districts. Manhattan contributed the more in population growth.

It is crystal clear that , in 1800 population was 60,515 and 18701 in Manhattan and other districts respectively. Additionally in 1900 population and percentage was average in comapred to other year .

Furthermore, in 2000 population was highest in other districts approximately 6 .50 lakh with 81 of the ratio ; however it was in 1.5 lakh in Manhattan.

Data about all districts of New York , in 1800 it was 79,216 of the people it was increase by about 3 lakh of indivisual. It was 8 lakh in 2000 in every districts

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

The response identifies the broad pattern that New York’s population was lowest in 1800 and highest in 2000, and it includes some relevant figures, such as Manhattan’s 60,515 residents in 1800 and the other districts’ 81% share in 2000. However, the overview is partly inaccurate: Manhattan did not contribute most to population growth; its population fell from 1,850,093 in 1900 to 1,538,096 in 2000, while the other districts grew substantially. Several comparisons are unclear or incorrect, including the claim that the 1900 figures were “average” and the statement that the city had “8 lakh” in 2000, rather than about 8 million. To develop the report, accurately compare the three years and highlight the shift in population share from Manhattan to the other districts.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0

There is some organisation: the response has an introduction, an overview and later paragraphs containing details, and transitions such as “Overall” and “Furthermore” signal movement between points. However, the progression is not consistently clear. The discussion jumps from district figures to the total city population, and the final sentence is difficult to interpret (“it was increase by about 3 lakh”). Some linking phrases are used mechanically or do not clarify the relationship between ideas, as in “Additionally in 1900… was average in comapred to other year.” Grouping the data by time period or comparing Manhattan with the other districts in each period would make the report easier to follow. Clearer references and more precise links between claims are also needed.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

The response uses a limited but relevant set of terms, including “population,” “districts,” “percentage” and “contributed,” so the topic is generally recognisable. However, noticeable spelling and word-choice problems sometimes make the meaning difficult to follow: “populants,” “popullation,” “minumum,” “comapred” and “indivisual” are inaccurate, while “average data” and “81 of the ratio” are not natural ways to describe these figures. The repeated use of “population” and “districts” also limits variety. Use accurate data-reporting language such as “accounted for,” “rose to,” “fell to” and “share of the total,” and check spelling carefully. Express large figures consistently in millions rather than using unclear forms such as “6.50 lakh” and “8 lakh.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response attempts a few longer structures, including “Overall, after analysing the tables it is clear that…” and a contrast introduced by “however.” Nevertheless, sentence structures are limited, and frequent errors affect clarity. Examples include missing articles in “First table,” faulty agreement and tense in “it was increase,” and incomplete or awkward constructions such as “Data about all districts of New York, in 1800 it was 79,216 of the people.” Commas are also misplaced, as in “It is crystal clear that ,” and some sentences join contrasting information without a clear grammatical structure. Practise forming complete sentences with a clear subject and verb, and use past-tense verbs consistently when describing the historical figures.

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.