Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-31

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)

To begin with, the below shows changes in the total population of New york city from 1800 to 2000. Furthermore, the second and the third table shows some drastic changes in the population of five different districts.

Overall, the population of new york city increased dramatically during 200 years period. while Mahattan was a dominanat district at the begining but over the priod it also got decreased. Whereas the combined population of Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens, Staten Island grew a lot.

In 1800, New york city only has a total population of 79,216. After 100 years it grew upto 3,437,202. Meanwhile in next 100 years it reached 2 times higher than the original number and reached 8,009,185 by 2000.

On the other hand in 1800 the total population of Manhattan was 60,515 with 75% total population percentage ratio. In 1900 it stood upto 1,850,093 with 54% . However, by 2000, the number off people living in Manhattan had declined to 1,538,096, also in share to 19%.

By contrast, the total number of population of four districst was 18,701 with 24% number ratio. While, after 100 years it gew upto 1,587,109 with 46% ratio. In next 100 it increased to 6,471,089 and total populatiion percentage increased to 81%.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You cover the main changes and provide a clear overview: the city’s population rose substantially, Manhattan’s share fell, and the other districts’ combined share grew. The figures for the city and district populations are generally accurate, and you compare all three years. This meets the task well, with some features more fully reported than others. One detail to correct is Manhattan’s 1800 share: the table gives 76%, not 75%. Also, saying the city’s population “reached 2 times higher than the original number” is inaccurate; it was about 2.3 times its 1900 level, while the 2000 total was far more than twice the 1800 figure. More precise comparisons and careful checking of percentages would strengthen the report.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, moving from an introduction and overview to the city total, Manhattan, and the other districts. Paragraphing helps the reader distinguish these groups, and transitions such as “Overall” and “By contrast” signal comparison. However, progression within paragraphs is sometimes weakened by awkward or repetitive linking, including “Meanwhile in next 100 years” and the sentence beginning “While, after 100 years”. Some references are also unclear: “the original number” does not specify which population figure is being compared. Aim for more direct topic sentences and connect each year’s figure in a consistent sequence. This would make the organisation easier to follow and reduce the impression of mechanically added transitions.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant vocabulary for describing trends, including “increased dramatically”, “declined”, “share” and “By contrast”, so the main information remains understandable. However, the range is limited and several word choices or collocations are inaccurate or unnatural, such as “total population percentage ratio”, “number ratio” and “stood upto”. Spelling errors—including “Mahattan”, “dominanat”, “begining” and “populatiion”—also make the writing less controlled. Use standard terms such as “proportion of the total population” and “accounted for” when reporting shares. More precise trend language, alongside careful proofreading, would make the comparisons clearer and more appropriate for an academic report.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex sentences, and the reader can generally understand the intended comparisons. However, control of sentence structure and verb forms is inconsistent. For example, “the second and the third table shows” has a subject–verb agreement error, while “New York city only has a total population” uses an unsuitable tense for a past year. The overview also contains a sentence fragment beginning “while Mahattan was…”, and “In next 100 it increased” is missing an article and a clear noun. Punctuation around percentages and clauses is also uneven. Practise forming complete sentences with consistent past-tense reporting, and check agreement, articles and sentence boundaries during revision.

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.