Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-10-11

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 the contemporary world, some people argue that more money should be allocated for the construction of new railway lines while others contend that it should be spent on the improvement of existing public transport. This essay will discuss both views before advocating the better approach.

In many countries, the condition of public transportation is inadequate to cope with the fast pace of modern life. To illustrate it, travellers have to face number of challenges to cover even shorter distances such as, inappropriate working system, untrained staff, and enough exhasut fumes engines, which make the commute uncomfortable. Moreover, some countries do not have sufficient railway routes for connecting them with other different cities. They have to rely on pumetro buses to cover even long distances for cities, which have to stop for few minutes at every stops. As a result, such scenerios create disturbance for commuters and consume their sufficient time.

On the other hand, some people believe that governments should allocate more money for the improvments of existing public transport rather than constructing new railway lines, because they would definietly require a huge amount of funding. Consequently, it would put additional pressure on governments reserviors. Therefore, it is better notion to spend money on existing metro buses and railways.

In summary, although constructing new railway lines would enable individuals to compete with the rapid pace of life, it requires considerable time and funding. That's why, from my perspective, it is better approach to improve existing public transport rather than spending funding on new tracks, because it would benefit both individuals and governments.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You present a clear preference for improving existing transport, especially in the final paragraph, and you give relevant reasons such as the high cost of new lines and the potential pressure on government finances. However, the discussion is uneven: the case for improving transport receives some explanation, while the benefits of very fast inter-city trains are only briefly mentioned as helping people keep pace with modern life. The first body paragraph also focuses mainly on shortcomings in current services rather than explaining why new high-speed lines would be worthwhile. To strengthen the response, develop both sides with specific consequences or examples, then make the comparison behind your opinion explicit.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction, two body paragraphs presenting contrasting views, and a conclusion that restates your position. Linking phrases such as “On the other hand,” “Moreover,” and “As a result” help signal relationships between ideas. However, the progression within the first body paragraph is not always clear: it moves from service problems to a lack of railway routes and then to buses, without clearly connecting these points to the case for high-speed trains. The second body paragraph also shifts quickly from cost to the conclusion that existing services should be improved. Use clearer topic sentences and explain how each supporting point advances the paragraph’s main argument.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some topic-relevant vocabulary, including “construction,” “public transportation,” “commuters,” “funding,” and “railway routes.” There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “allocate more money” and “additional pressure.” However, noticeable spelling and word-choice errors reduce precision, including “exhasut fumes engines,” “pumetro buses,” “scenerios,” “improvments,” and “reserviors.” Some combinations are also unnatural, such as “cover even shorter distances” and “spend funding.” These choices can make parts of the argument difficult to interpret. Check spelling carefully and learn common transport collocations; for example, use “exhaust-emitting vehicles,” “metro buses,” and “allocate funds.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex sentences, including clauses introduced by “while,” “because,” and “which,” and most of the main ideas remain understandable. Some grammatical errors, however, affect accuracy. For example, “have to face number of challenges” needs an article (“a number of challenges”), and “at every stops” has a number-agreement error (“at every stop”). In “it is better approach,” an article is missing, while “which have to stop” does not clearly agree with its intended reference. Punctuation also needs attention in the list after “such as.” Practise checking articles, agreement, and pronoun references, while keeping complex sentences controlled.

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.