Band 8.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 8.5 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-08-29

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 8.5)

Governments in several countries face a choice between investing heavily in high-speed intercity rail links and channelling the same funds into upgrading the transport networks they already operate. While both approaches have merit, I believe that improving existing services should generally take priority.

Those who advocate high-speed rail point to its long-term economic and environmental benefits. Fast connections between major cities shorten journey times dramatically, which allows businesses to operate across a wider area and can revitalise regions that have fallen behind the capital. Japan's Shinkansen network, for instance, has helped sustain thriving commercial centres well outside Tokyo. Such lines also draw passengers away from short-haul flights and private cars, both of which produce considerably more carbon emissions per traveller, so the initial expense may be justified by decades of cleaner and more efficient travel.

Nevertheless, there are strong arguments for prioritising existing infrastructure. High-speed projects tend to benefit a relatively narrow group — typically business travellers moving between major cities — whereas overcrowded buses, ageing metro systems and unreliable local trains affect millions of ordinary commuters every day. The sums involved are also enormous: Britain's HS2 line has absorbed tens of billions of pounds while regional services in the north of England remain underfunded. Money spent on additional buses, more frequent timetables and better maintenance would deliver visible improvements far sooner and to a much larger proportion of the population.

In my view, the second position is more persuasive, at least in the short term. A country whose everyday transport is failing gains little from a prestige line that most citizens will rarely use, and reliable local networks are in any case necessary to feed passengers into any future high-speed route. Governments should therefore repair and expand what they already have before committing to spectacular new projects.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 8.0

The response fully addresses all parts of the task. You have clearly discussed both perspectives—the economic and environmental benefits of high-speed rail and the practical, social advantages of improving existing infrastructure—while maintaining a consistent and well-supported personal opinion throughout. The ideas are well-developed, particularly the comparison between the niche benefits of high-speed rail and the widespread impact of local transport improvements. The use of the Shinkansen and HS2 as illustrative examples adds depth and credibility to your arguments. Your position is clear from the introduction and is reinforced effectively in the conclusion, meeting all requirements for a high band score.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 8.5

The essay is logically organized with a clear progression of ideas. Each paragraph has a central focus, and the transition between the two viewpoints is smooth, using effective linking phrases such as 'Nevertheless' and 'In my view'. Cohesive devices are used naturally and unobtrusively, such as 'for instance', 'whereas', and 'in any case'. The paragraphing is skillful, with each section serving a distinct purpose in the overall argument. The flow of information is seamless, guiding the reader through your reasoning without any confusion or mechanical repetition.

Lexical Resource — Band 8.0

You demonstrate a wide and sophisticated range of vocabulary, using terms like 'channelling', 'revitalise', 'thriving commercial centres', and 'prestige line' with precision. The collocation is natural throughout, and the language is consistently appropriate for an academic context. There are no noticeable errors in word choice or spelling. The vocabulary is not only accurate but also contributes to the persuasive tone of the essay, showing a high level of lexical control that allows for nuanced expression of complex ideas.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 8.5

The essay exhibits a wide range of complex structures, including conditional clauses, relative clauses, and varied sentence lengths. The grammar is highly accurate, with the majority of sentences being error-free. Punctuation is used correctly to enhance clarity. You show excellent control over complex grammatical forms, such as 'A country whose everyday transport is failing gains little from a prestige line that most citizens will rarely use'. There are no significant grammatical slips, and the control over tense and aspect is consistent with the requirements of a high-level response.

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.