Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-09-28
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 today's rapidly evolving world, the allocation of authorities' funds has become one of the socio-economic concerns across the world. Meanwhile, a substantial number of individuals assert that it is vital for the governments to spend a vast amount of money to construct new railway lines for very fast trains across cities, other contend that money ought to allocated on upgrading existing public transport. This essay will discuss both perspective before expalaining my opinion.
To begin with, proponents of this theory emphasize the view that constructing new railway systems can be proven to be an advatageous for the populatio, allowing them to travel long distance journeys with comfort and productivity. Moreover, in recent years, in developed nations it can be seen that constructed railway systems are not only used for passanger travelling but also utilised for importing and exporting products and raw materials. For instance, according a report
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 4.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.0
The response is significantly under-length, containing only 148 words compared to the minimum requirement of 250 words. Because the text cuts off mid-sentence ('For instance, according a report'), it fails to complete the second body paragraph, fully discuss both views, or present a complete conclusion. Consequently, the development of ideas is severely truncated. While the introduction outlines the topic and states an intention to discuss both perspectives, the incomplete nature of the response severely restricts task fulfilment, aligning best with Band 4.0 descriptors for Task Achievement due to the minimal and incomplete completion of the prompt requirements.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0
The text demonstrates some logical organisation at the beginning, featuring standard introductory phrasing ('To begin with, proponents of this theory emphasize...'). However, because the essay breaks off abruptly mid-sentence, overall progression cannot be fully evaluated. Paragraphing is attempted with a clear introduction and the start of a body paragraph, but referencing and cohesive links are limited due to the truncated length. Cohesion is sometimes mechanical or faulty, such as the awkward transition 'other contend that money ought to allocated' in the introduction. Overall, the structural coherence is disrupted by the premature ending, but the language produced up to that point shows basic organisational awareness, fitting a Band 5.0.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.0
The student attempts some less common and topic-specific vocabulary, such as 'rapidly evolving world', 'allocation of authorities' funds', and 'socio-economic concerns'. However, there are notable word choice and collocation errors, including 'ought to allocated' (missing the passive 'be') and spelling errors such as 'expalaining', 'advatageous', 'populatio', 'distance journeys', and 'passanger'. The range is adequate for basic communication, but the errors in word form and spelling restrict the score. The vocabulary demonstrates a mix of adequate everyday terms and flawed attempts at more advanced items, which is characteristic of Band 5.0.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0
The student demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, attempting relative clauses and introductory dependent clauses (e.g., 'In today's rapidly evolving world, the allocation...'). However, grammatical accuracy is inconsistent. There are several clear errors, such as missing auxiliary or passive verbs ('money ought to allocated'), missing prepositional components ('according a report' instead of 'according to a report'), and plural/singular agreement issues ('this perspective' after mentioning both views). Because the text is very short, complex structures are limited and frequent minor errors affect readability, placing the grammar performance firmly at 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.