Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-09-22

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 5.5)

In many countries, few individuals argue that it is mandatory to invest obvious amount of money on building new railway lines for high speed between cities. Others suggest that money should be invested on making better existing common people transport. The way I think, more reservoirs should be spent on fast train developemnet.

Firstly, the trains play a connector between different cities, as individuals use to go out to other city for occupation perposes by using trains which is time saving. A normal train takes 5 hours to go to London from Bermingham, but on fast trains it usually take 2 hours. So that individuals can strike a balance between work and personal life by saving time. On the other hand, one fast train is carrying more passengers which reduces the individuals carbon foot print.If a common person uses public transport and changes buses after avery half an hour, it will contribute to his more participation in carbon emission.By the quick trains citizens will feel easy to meet their family members residing in other city.

On the other hand, other citizens believe that more budget should be spent on local transport rather than fast trains, public transport gives convince in inter city areas which is beneficial for persons having work in same city. Vehicles of local transport are sometime uncomfortable to travel for long journey,so opting fast trains is better option.

In a nutshell, more budget should be spent on fast trains rather than on local transport as trains provide comfortable and time saving journey to other cities.Authorities should go an extra mile to make it possible.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5

The student addresses all parts of the prompt by discussing both views—building new high-speed rail networks and improving existing public transport—and provides a clear personal opinion in favor of fast trains. The position is maintained throughout the essay. However, the development of ideas lacks depth and relies on somewhat simple reasoning. For instance, the discussion on carbon footprints and commuting is somewhat brief and repetitive. The points are relevant, but they tend to be under-developed, which corresponds to the Band 6 descriptors. To reach a higher band, the student should expand upon their ideas with more detailed explanations, specific real-world examples, and fully fleshed-out supporting arguments rather than listing brief statements.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5

The essay displays a generally coherent overall arrangement with a clear paragraph structure, featuring an introduction, body paragraphs addressing both sides and the writer's view, and a conclusion. However, cohesion is sometimes mechanical or faulty. The student overuses transitional phrases like 'On the other hand' incorrectly or awkwardly, applying it twice to introduce different sections that do not necessarily contrast in the intended manner. Referencing is occasionally unclear, such as 'The way I think, more reservoirs should be spent...', where word choice impairs the logical flow. Paragraphing is present and separates the core ideas adequately, but progression within paragraphs can feel disjointed. These characteristics align well with a Band 6 score.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

The student demonstrates an adequate vocabulary range for the task, attempting some less common collocations and topic-related words such as 'carbon footprint', 'inter city areas', and 'public transport'. However, there are notable inappropriate word choices and collocations that reveal limitations, such as 'invest obvious amount of money' instead of 'significant amount', 'common people transport' instead of 'local or public transport', and 'more reservoirs should be spent' instead of 'resources'. Spelling and word formation errors also appear, such as 'developemnet', 'perposes', and 'Bermingham'. While communication is not severely impeded, these frequent inaccuracies prevent the vocabulary from reaching a Band 7 level, making Band 5.5 or 6.0 appropriate. Given the successful communication of basic concepts, a Band 6.0 is awarded.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

The essay uses a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, demonstrating some ability to form conditional structures and relative clauses (e.g., 'If a common person uses public transport...'). However, there are frequent grammatical errors and awkward phrasings throughout the text, such as 'few individuals argue that it is mandatory to invest obvious amount', 'on fast trains it usually take', and 'citizens will feel easy to meet'. Punctuation and article usage also show inconsistencies. Although these errors do not completely obscure the meaning, they occur regularly and restrict the accuracy needed for a higher band. This performance fits the Band 5.0 to 6.0 profile, settling comfortably at Band 5.5 due to the noticeable density of grammatical inaccuracies.

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.