Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-09-27
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)
Some people argue that spending money on railway construction is beneficial for individuals that connects many cities to eachother. While on the other hand, others believe that governtment should spend money on existing public transport for improvement.
Firstly, it depends on choice and demands of public. I believe that spend money on existing transport is far better than to constructing new one. Because people are more familiar with everyday transport. They are use to for it. For example when government facillitate the public f they are more easy and find comfort to daily travel. Moreover, its a safe option for environment and availability. In addition, if someone spend money they upgrade the features in transport. Also add charger points in it. Make it convienient for everyone. Moreover, existing transport requires less budget to make it renew. Upgrading current sysem reduce everyday traffice and lowers air pollution. Fixing and upgrading the current system requires less money as compare to build new railwayline. Local residents and low income public can afford it.
Secondly, Others are believe that trains are more convienent for daily work. Government should spend money to construct new railway lines for better transport. Therefore, Trains are much faster then buses. Trains reduce the travel time as compare to buses. Modern trains produce fewer emission per pessanger.
In my opinion, both have positive and negative reviews. The ideal choice depends on nation's infrastructure and needs.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0
The response addresses both views regarding fast railway lines and existing public transport, and offers a personal opinion, although the stance is slightly confused by stating in the conclusion that both have positive and negative reviews. Crucially, the length requirement of 250 words is not met, as the student's response contains only 235 words. This under-length impacts the depth of idea development, leading to a Band 5 rating. While the main ideas are introduced, they are somewhat repetitive and lack the fully extended support expected at higher bands. To improve, the student must ensure the word count exceeds the 250-word minimum and expand upon each argument with more detailed explanations and concrete examples.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0
The essay demonstrates some basic organisation with transitional markers such as 'Firstly' and 'Secondly'. However, paragraphing is underdeveloped, and the grouping of ideas lacks a clear overall progression. For instance, the first body paragraph mixes arguments about existing public transport with environmental benefits and cost comparisons in a disjointed manner. Cohesive devices are at times repetitive, mechanical, or inaccurately used (e.g., 'While on the other hand, others believe...'). Referencing is also occasionally unclear. To achieve a higher band, the student should structure paragraphs around single, distinct main ideas and use cohesive devices more naturally to guide the reader smoothly through the argument.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.0
The vocabulary used is generally basic and repetitive, employing common words such as 'spend money', 'transport', and 'better'. There are noticeable lexical errors and awkward collocations throughout the text, such as 'governtment', 'use to for it', 'more easy and find comfort', and 'produce fewer emission per pessanger'. The range is minimally adequate for the task, allowing the writer to communicate basic ideas, but frequent word-choice errors and spelling mistakes restrict the score to a Band 5. To improve, the student needs to incorporate a wider variety of less common lexical items and pay closer attention to word forms and spelling.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0
The response contains a mix of simple and attempted complex sentence forms, but grammatical accuracy is quite low. There are frequent errors in tense, subject-verb agreement, and sentence structure, such as 'spend money on existing transport is far better than to constructing new one', 'if someone spend money they upgrade', and 'Others are believe that trains are more convienent'. Punctuation is also problematic, with several sentence fragments and run-on structures. These frequent errors cause some difficulty for the reader, aligning the grammar with the Band 5 descriptors. The writer should focus on mastering basic sentence construction and reducing errors in complex 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.