Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-10-07

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, there is on going dabate about government should invest havily in constructing new railway lines for high speed trains or focus on improving the public transport systems. While both approches have significant advantages, I beleive that developing railways for high speed trains should be given a grater priority, particularly for conecting major cities.

On one hand, improving public transport can provide immediate benefits to a large number of people. In many cities, buses, trains and subways are unreliable and poorly managed. Investing in these services could make journeys more comfortable and efficient for passengers. Moreover, better public transport within cities could reduce the number of private cars on the roads, which reduce the traffic conjestion and air pollution. Take an example of Japan, who invested heavily in public transport system, particulalry in cities such as Tokyo and Osaka. Buses and well maintained trains services allow millins of people to travel efficiently without relaying heavily on private cars. Thus, the supporters of improving public transport support their findings back their analysis with valid arguments.

On the other hand, constructing high speed railway lines between major cities can bring long term benefits. As these transports can transport passengers over long distances much faster than conventional services. It can also be a more environment friendly alternative to short distance flights and large number of private vehicles. For instance

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

You introduce both sides of the debate and state a clear preference for high-speed rail, while the paragraph on existing public transport gives relevant benefits such as reducing car use, congestion and pollution. However, the response addresses the task only partially: the high-speed rail argument is not completed, and the final example begins with “For instance” but gives no supporting detail. Your opinion is stated but not explained with reasons or a concrete example, so the main ideas remain under-developed. The response also falls 22 words short of the required minimum. To strengthen the answer, complete the second viewpoint, develop your own position with specific consequences or evidence, and ensure the response meets the stated length requirement.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, a paragraph beginning “On one hand,” and a contrasting paragraph beginning “On the other hand.” This helps the reader identify the two viewpoints, and the ideas within the first body paragraph generally follow a sensible order. However, progression is incomplete because the second body paragraph stops after “For instance,” leaving the example and discussion unfinished. Some linking is also mechanical, particularly the repeated use of “Moreover,” “Thus,” and explicit side markers. The sentence about supporters “support[ing] their findings back their analysis” is difficult to follow and disrupts the paragraph’s flow. Complete each paragraph, use clear links between cause and effect, and make references and transitions more natural.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use some relevant topic vocabulary, including “high speed trains,” “conventional services,” “air pollution,” and “private cars,” which allows you to discuss transport choices. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “long term benefits” and “environment friendly alternative.” However, spelling errors are frequent and noticeable, including “dabate,” “beleive,” “conjestion,” and “millins.” Some word combinations are also inaccurate or unclear: “support their findings back their analysis” does not express a clear meaning, and “these transports” is not a natural way to refer to trains. This limits precision and can distract the reader. Check spelling carefully and learn common collocations for transport and investment, such as “rail infrastructure” and “reduce traffic congestion.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mixture of simple and more complex structures, including the contrast clause “While both approaches have significant advantages” and the conditional idea “Investing in these services could make journeys…” These show some range, and the main message is usually understandable. However, several sentence-level problems affect accuracy. “There is on going debate about government should invest” needs a grammatical link, such as “a debate about whether the government should invest.” “Which reduce the traffic congestion” has a subject–verb agreement problem, while “As these transports can transport…” is a dependent clause presented as a sentence. The unfinished “For instance” also leaves the final structure incomplete. Practise embedded questions, agreement, and complete sentence construction, then proofread punctuation and articles.

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.