Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-10-15

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 6.0)

Whether spending a heavy capital on constructing the new railway routes for faster trains among different cities or upgrading the current public transport routes is a subject of intense debate in various countries. In my opinion, while there are valid arguments on both sides, I firmly believe that intoducing the modern underground train lines is the primary factor.

On the one hand, many people argue that the older transportation should be improved to reduce a possibility of severe accidents caused by roads breakage and poor drainage system of transportation. Additionally, cost of improving present transportation would be comparatively less than developing fresh railroads. For instance, Pakistani public survey show that their government spent heavy amount of money to repair the established transport instead of spending more to make additional railway lines.

On the other hand, I would argue that launching cutting-edge rail networks is a vastly superior approach to get immediate benefits. This is primarily becuase undeground train tracks can certainly reduce traffic congestion by attracting some traffic towards itself. Consequently, accident risks would also be dropped if traffic is divided on different routes. A clear example of this can be seen in the USA where underground trains links are implemented so far due to which they rarely go through traffic jams.

In conclusion, although enhancing existing public transport has its merits in certain contexts, I reiterate that implementing supplementary train tracks is the paramount approach that would provide essential benefits. Moreover, it is crucial that governments also support this method to ensure positive outcomes.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You discuss both options and state a consistent preference for new rail networks, so the response addresses the main parts of the task. The case for improving existing transport includes lower costs and safety concerns, while the opposing view links new underground lines to reduced congestion and accidents. However, these points are not developed evenly: the first paragraph’s reference to a Pakistani survey is vague and does not explain what the example demonstrates, and the claim that underground trains in the USA mean they “rarely go through traffic jams” is broad and insufficiently supported. Your opinion is clear, but explaining the trade-offs and giving more precise evidence would make the discussion more complete and convincing.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The essay has a clear overall arrangement: an introduction, separate paragraphs for the two views, and a conclusion that restates your position. Signposting such as “On the one hand,” “On the other hand,” and “In conclusion” helps readers follow the discussion. The progression within paragraphs is generally understandable, with cause-and-effect links introduced by “Additionally” and “Consequently.” However, some connections feel mechanical, and the relationship between the examples and the claims is not always made explicit. For instance, the Pakistani survey is mentioned without clarifying how it supports the case for improving existing transport. Develop each paragraph’s central point before moving to its example, and use clearer references to connect evidence back to the argument.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use a range of topic-related vocabulary, including “traffic congestion,” “rail networks,” “transportation,” and “accident risks,” and you attempt more formal expressions such as “paramount approach.” This gives the response an appropriate academic tone in places. However, several word choices and collocations are inaccurate or unnatural, which limits precision: “spending a heavy capital,” “roads breakage,” and “fresh railroads” do not express the intended ideas naturally. There are also spelling errors, including “intoducing,” “becuase,” and “undeground.” Aim for accurate, conventional collocations rather than adding formality through unusual phrasing. Proofreading spelling and checking how words combine will make your vocabulary more effective and easier to understand.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, including a concession in the introduction (“while there are valid arguments on both sides”) and a conditional clause in the conclusion (“although enhancing existing public transport has its merits”). Most sentences communicate their main meaning, and errors rarely prevent understanding. Some grammatical inaccuracies remain, particularly with articles, agreement, and sentence construction. For example, “Pakistani public survey show” needs a determiner and a verb agreeing with the subject, while “underground trains links are implemented” has a subject–verb agreement problem. The phrase “cost of improving present transportation” also needs more accurate article use. Review agreement and articles in longer sentences, and check that each clause has a clear, correctly formed subject and verb.

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.