Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-10-17

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

It is better to buy just a few expensive clothes, rather than lots of cheaper clothes.

Do you agree or disagree?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Student answer (Band 6.5)

I highly agree with the statement that "It is better to buy just a few expensive clothes, rather than lots of cheaper clothes" as investing your hard earned money in quality is better than hoarding cheap stuff which not last long.

For instance my work calls for regularly scheduled in person meetings several times in a month and I have to adequately represent my company in front of government heads for securing future contracts. Dressing up in decent clothes boosts my confidence and helps me stay relevant for my job. Therefore I frequently invest in good quality formals which last me long and help me leave a lasting impression. Expensive laundry retains form and colours for a longer duration thus making investing in them fruitful.

On the other hand for my casuals like loungewear and activity clothes I donotlike to invest larger amounts because they get worn frequently and are subject to wear and tear over the due course of time. In this way I can toss them out and buy in newer ones in couple of years thus keeping variety and relevance.

In adddition to this textile garbage is one of the largest enviromental pollution today. It takes more than two hundred years for natural fibre to decompost therefore investing in good quality clothes is indirectly a positive green move on one's behalf. This reduces the burden of individual fabric waste on a smaller scale and lesser carbon footprint for our planet.

To conclude investing in costly clothes can be better choice than gathering multiple cheaper options which eventually lasts less than a season.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

Your position is clear from the opening: you agree that buying fewer, better-quality clothes is preferable, and you return to this view in the conclusion. The work-clothing example is relevant and developed with details about meetings, representing your company, confidence, and durability. You also acknowledge a qualification by distinguishing formal clothes from casual wear, then add an environmental reason. These points address the task and are supported, although the casual-clothing argument partly complicates your overall position without fully explaining how it fits your main claim. The claim that natural fibres take more than two hundred years to decompose is also broad and would benefit from qualification or support. To strengthen the response further, explain more explicitly when paying more is worthwhile and develop the environmental point with a precise link to reduced consumption.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The response has a clear overall progression: you state your view, give a personal example, introduce a contrast about casual clothes, add an environmental reason, and conclude. Paragraphing helps readers follow these stages, and signposts such as “For instance,” “On the other hand,” and “To conclude” make the relationships between ideas clear. The contrast paragraph is relevant, but its connection to your central argument could be made more explicit: explain why buying cheaper casual items does not undermine your preference for fewer expensive clothes overall. Some linking is also formulaic, particularly the repeated use of explicit transitions. Use a few more links within paragraphs, and refer back to key ideas such as durability and waste to create smoother continuity.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range for the topic, including phrases such as “wear and tear,” “lasting impression,” “textile garbage,” and “carbon footprint.” These help communicate ideas about clothing quality, professional appearance, and environmental impact. There are also attempts at more specific vocabulary, but some choices are inaccurate or unnatural: “expensive laundry” does not mean expensive clothing, and “gathering multiple cheaper options” is an awkward way to describe buying clothes. Spelling errors such as “enviromental,” “decompost,” and “adddition” also reduce accuracy. Aim for more natural collocations and check spelling carefully; for example, use “quality garments” and “textile waste.” This would make your vocabulary more precise while preserving the clear meaning of your argument.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, including a conditional-style explanation of how clothing affects your work and a sentence beginning “On the other hand” to introduce contrast. Most ideas remain understandable, but some grammatical errors occur. In the opening, “stuff which not last long” needs a finite verb form, such as “stuff that does not last long.” In “they get worn frequently and are subject to wear and tear,” the reference of “they” could be clearer, and “in couple of years” needs an article. The final sentence also has a subject–verb agreement problem: “options which eventually lasts” should use “last.” Review articles, verb agreement, and sentence boundaries, while continuing to use varied structures.

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.