Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-09-16
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)
It is often argued by some people that it is necessary to spend large amount fo money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Meanwhile, others believe that the money should be spent on improving existing public transport. However, I believe that it is necessary to spend money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities.
On the one hand, the supporter of the constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities that helps people to travel from one city to another. As many countries of the world spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains. Take an example of the United Arab Emirates, where governament had spent about 2 billion dollars in 2018 to launch new railway lines for bullet trains. Thus, this proves that new railway lines are beneficial for humaity.
While on the other hand, the supporter of the public transport that the money should be spent on improving existing public transport. As when money spend on improving existing public transport it also improve the quality of travel and people can easily and comfortably travel to another place. For example, the minister of public transport of Japan recently announced that they will spend about 2 million dollars to improve existing public transport till 2028. Hence, the improvement of existing public transport also beneficial for humanity.
However, I believe that spending money on constructing new railway lines for bullet trains between cities in indeed beneficial for humanity. As bullet trains reduce the time of travel people can easily travel from one city to another city.
To sum up, eventhough bullet trains have shorten the time of travel, but from my prespective through bullets trains we can carry patients also from one city to another.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5
The response addresses all parts of the prompt by discussing both views on public transport spending and providing a personal opinion. However, the development of ideas is somewhat repetitive and lacks depth. For instance, the arguments for high-speed rail and public transport rely heavily on generic statements regarding benefits to humanity and travel convenience. The student attempts to provide examples, such as mentioning the United Arab Emirates and Japan, but the details provided are simplistic and the reasoning remains somewhat under-developed. Nevertheless, a clear position is maintained throughout the essay. The essay earns a Band 5.5 for task achievement because the ideas are limited, repetitive, and lack the extension and specific support required for a higher band.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0
The essay displays a basic structural organization with an introduction, separate body paragraphs for each view, a restatement of the writer's opinion, and a conclusion. However, cohesion is frequently faulty and mechanical. The student relies heavily on formulaic transitions like On the one hand, While on the other hand, and However, often misapplying them grammatically (e.g., 'the supporter of the constructing new railway lines...'). Paragraphing is attempted, but the logical progression within paragraphs is disrupted by grammatical errors and repetitive phrasing. Referencing is sometimes unclear, and the overall flow lacks the flexibility expected at higher bands. This performance aligns best with Band 5.0 descriptors, where some organization is present but cohesion is inadequate and repetitive.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The student uses a limited vocabulary range that is minimally adequate for the task. There are noticeable errors in word choice, morphology, and collocation throughout the text, such as 'large amount fo money' (typographical and collocation error), 'the supporter of the constructing' (incorrect word form), and 'humanity' used repetitively where 'society' or 'commuters' would be more appropriate. Less common lexical items are attempted but generally misused or inaccurate. While communication is not entirely impeded, the frequent lexical errors restrict the score to Band 5.0, reflecting a limited vocabulary range and noticeable inaccuracies that cause difficulty for the reader.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0
The essay contains a very limited range of sentence structures, with heavy reliance on simple sentences and flawed attempts at complex constructions. Frequent grammatical errors are present, including subject-verb agreement issues ('governament had spent'), missing articles, incorrect prepositional phrases, and tense inconsistencies ('when money spend'). Punctuation and sentence boundaries are also problematic, particularly in the concluding sentence which links clauses awkwardly with 'eventhough... but'. Because errors are frequent, affect basic sentence construction, and can occasionally cause difficulty for the reader, the grammar performance corresponds to Band 5.0.
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.