Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-09-29

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 6.5)

In today's rapidly evolving world, the significance of 'public transportation' has been rising accross the world, uplifting the life of general public, by providing flexibility and convinience. Meanwhile, it is debated that authorities ought to construct railway lines or upgrade existing public transport. This essay will discuus both views before expailing my perspective.

To begin with, the former view emphasizes that constructing additional raiway lines across cities would make the journey of passengers more rapid and convinient. To elaborate, if new railway lines are built, allowing individuals to get all facilities at an inexpesive rate, then a substantial number of individuals will adopt railway systems, which can not only reduce their cost of travelling but also afford authorities a mere amount of funds, which would stimulate economic productivity of the country. Furtherore, railway lines can also be utilised for import and export of the goods, which can diminish the requirement to opt airways. Consequently, the issue air pollution can be mitigated, because commercial flights and helicopters release a vast amount of emissions in the atmosphere.

On the other hand, despite the given argument, a myriad number of individuals assert that improving existing public transportation system would be more efficient for governments than building new railway lines, enabling them to save financial resources, and allocate them into other indispensable services such as education, healthcare and scientific research. Additionally, or Finstance, according to a survey conducted by the organisation called the WWO- World Wide Organisaiton, results depicted that the ratio of contaminated air in the UK-United Kingdom, is less than 4%, since all inhabitants are allowed to commute by public buses, and they are charged substatially for running their personal vehicles, which are allocated in upgrading public transportation system.

In my opinion, although railway lines can be an advantageous approach for both authorities and citizens, improving the systems of current public trasnportation would be more viable, bacause it might encourage policymakers to allocate fund in other social developments.

To conclude, the construcation of new railway lines can be crucial to enhance convinience and save commuting cost. However, upgrading current systems is not as essential as building new railways.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

The response addresses all parts of the task by discussing both views on public transport spending (building new fast railway lines vs. improving existing infrastructure) and presenting a clear personal opinion. The main ideas are extended and supported, such as discussing economic productivity, environmental benefits, and the redirection of funds to social services like healthcare and education. However, there are some logical leaps, such as the claim that building railways would diminish the requirement for airways, and minor over-generalisations. The position is maintained throughout the essay. Overall, the response fulfills the requirements of Band 6.5 to Band 7.0 for Task Achievement, and is awarded a solid Band 6.5 due to slight under-development in certain supporting arguments.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The essay displays a coherent overall arrangement with a clear logical progression. Paragraphing is used appropriately to separate the introduction, the two body paragraphs discussing opposing views, the writer's opinion, and a brief conclusion. Cohesive devices are employed, such as 'To begin with', 'On the other hand', and 'Consequently', though some referencing is slightly mechanical or awkward, like 'the former view' and 'despite the given argument'. Paragraph transitions generally work well to guide the reader through the argumentation. These characteristics align closely with the Band 6.5 to 7.0 descriptors; a Band 6.5 is awarded to reflect the occasional mechanical feel of the cohesive devices.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

The student uses an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, attempting less common items such as 'economic productivity', 'indispensable services', and 'contaminated air'. However, there are numerous spelling and word-choice errors throughout the text, including 'accross', 'convinience', 'discuus', 'expailing', 'raiway', 'inexpesive', 'Furtherore', 'substatially', 'trasnportation', 'bacause', and 'construcation'. While communication is rarely impeded entirely, the frequency of these lexical and spelling inaccuracies prevents the essay from reaching a higher band. These features fit comfortably into the Band 6.0 descriptor.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

The essay demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, utilising conditional structures and relative clauses (e.g., 'if new railway lines are built, allowing individuals to get all facilities...'). There are frequent errors in grammar and punctuation, particularly regarding missing articles, awkward preposition usage (e.g., 'allocate fund in other social developments' instead of 'allocate funds to other social developments'), and punctuation errors like 'or Finstance'. Although these errors do not impede communication, they occur regularly enough to prevent the writing from achieving Band 7.0. The grammar is best evaluated at a Band 6.0 level.

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.