Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-10-17

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 recent period, there is an argument about whether railway lines should be introduced or money should be spent on existing public transport. Some believe that large amount of money should be spent on contructing new railway lines for fast trains whereas other argue on money being invested on improving old public transport. In my opinion, money should be spend on previous transports to avoid the risk from fast trains.

The idea of new railway lines is to fasten the trains between cities which can save time to reach somewhere early. This can help people who work. As many employees avoid travelling another city due to the long route by car, bikes, or buses and the thought of not coming back to work on time haunts them to even think about travelling. For example, a person who's mother living in the next city is ill and needs to be there as soon as possible. Therefore, these new innovations can help tackle emergencies as well.

Whereas, many individual carry a thought of good amount being invest on old transports as it will help individual travel on daily basis. The buses can be introduced more along with some necessities involved in it like wifi to help people relax while travelling. Cabs should have access to reach every place in a country as some rural areas are avoided and people suffer to travel from there. For Instance, a low economic person travels often by bus to his work. As a result, wor-life is managed smoothly.

In conclusion, most of the time is saved after traveling from fast trains whereas improving existing public transport is beneficial for people on daily basis. I believe, the good amount of money should be spend of existing public transport to avoid risk and confusions from the new ones.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You address both sides of the discussion and state a clear preference for improving existing transport, particularly in the introduction and conclusion. The benefits of fast trains are linked to saving time and reaching people in emergencies, while the other view includes more frequent buses and better access for rural communities. These are relevant points, but some support is unclear or not fully developed: the example about an ill relative does not explain why a fast train is necessary, and the claim that new trains bring “risk and confusions” is not explained. Develop each argument with a clearer cause-and-effect explanation and make your comparison more balanced.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction, separate paragraphs for the two views, and a conclusion. This makes the discussion easy to follow at a broad level, and transitions such as “Whereas” and “In conclusion” signal changes in direction. However, some links between ideas are mechanical or unclear. For example, “As many employees avoid travelling another city…” does not connect smoothly to the preceding claim, and “As a result, wor-life is managed smoothly” is difficult to interpret. The conclusion repeats the preference but does not bring the arguments together. Use clearer referencing and connect examples explicitly to the point they support.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use enough topic-related vocabulary to communicate the main ideas, including “railway lines,” “public transport,” “rural areas,” and “emergencies.” There are also attempts at less common phrasing, such as “tackle emergencies” and “daily basis.” However, word choice and collocation are often inaccurate or unnatural, sometimes making meaning difficult to follow: “fasten the trains” should describe increasing their speed, while “good amount being invest on old transports” is unclear. Spelling errors such as “contructing” and “Instance” also reduce accuracy. Aim for precise, natural combinations and check word forms and spelling; this will make your arguments easier to understand.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt both simple and complex sentence forms, including a relative clause in “a person who's mother living in the next city is ill” and a conditional-style explanation of why people avoid travelling. The overall meaning is usually recoverable, but some errors in verb forms, agreement, articles, and sentence construction remain. For example, “money should be spend” needs a past participle, “many individual carry” has a number-agreement problem, and “a person who's mother living” has errors in both the possessive form and clause structure. Some long sentences also become difficult to control. Practise accurate subject–verb agreement and verb patterns, and divide complex explanations into shorter, complete sentences.

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.