Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-11-13

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

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

 

Student answer (Band 5.0)

In a number of states, some people believe that spent large amount of money on build new railway lines for very fast train around all the city. Other people feel the money should be spent on old public transport infrastructures and roads better. From my perspective i agree with second view of the given statement.

On the one hand, creating new railway lines between the city is very expensive. because manufacturing the new railway lines in cities there are huge disadvantages for public, for example, if government build a new railway tracks in city firstly Existing buildings will have to be demolished. However i disagree with first view because citizen can face very big issues.

On the other hand, government should spent lare source of income on decorated the old infrastructures such as roads,buss systems and taxi system because its all expense solve in lower cost and citizens can not face any problems. For example, Improving the existing public transport system will cause no harm to the citizens, and it will also save government expenditure.

In conclusion, spending money on existing public transport will have huge beneficial to the citizens on the other hand spent large amount of money on build new railway lines are some issues to citizens and it is very expensive to government.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

You state a clear preference for improving existing transport in the introduction and return to it in the conclusion. You also mention a relevant drawback of new railways—buildings may need to be demolished—and give a reason to support upgrading current services. However, the discussion of both views is only partial: the case for very fast trains is not explained, and the benefits of existing transport are asserted rather than developed with specific examples. The response also contains fewer than the required 250 words, so there is limited space to explain and support the ideas. To strengthen the response, develop each side with a clear benefit and example, then explain why your preferred option is more convincing.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, one paragraph for each view, and a conclusion. The signposts “On the one hand,” “On the other hand,” and “In conclusion” help readers follow the broad organisation. However, progression within paragraphs is sometimes unclear. For example, the first body paragraph moves from the cost of railways to demolition and then repeats disagreement without fully connecting these points. The conclusion also combines contrasting ideas in one long sentence. Use clearer topic sentences and link each reason to its consequence; separate ideas with accurate punctuation, and avoid repeating the same contrast markers when a more direct connection would be clearer.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some task-relevant vocabulary, including “railway lines,” “public transport,” “demolished,” and “government expenditure,” so the main topic is generally understandable. However, the range is limited and several word choices or collocations are inaccurate, which sometimes makes the meaning awkward: “decorated the old infrastructures” does not express improving them, and “huge beneficial” is not a natural phrase. There are also spelling errors such as “buss” and “lare.” Aim for precise transport and policy vocabulary, and check whether verbs naturally combine with their objects. For example, use “upgrade infrastructure” and “allocate funding” rather than literal or imprecise combinations.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex sentences, including a conditional example beginning “if government build,” and use contrast clauses to organise your argument. However, errors are frequent, and some sentences are difficult to process. Examples include “some people believe that spent large amount,” “government should spent,” and “citizen can face,” where verb forms, articles, or plural agreement are not controlled. Sentence boundaries and punctuation also need attention: “because manufacturing…” begins as a fragment, while the first body paragraph contains an unclear run-on sequence. Practise building accurate subject–verb–object sentences first, then add subordinate clauses with correct verb forms, articles, and punctuation.

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.