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)

It is often argued that some civilians belive that it is important to spend huge amont of funds on the development of new railway tracks, to save the essential time of individuals during travelling among various societies. Others think that funds should be spent on the better enhancement of public travelling. Although both views have valid arguments, I strongly assert that money should be spent on public transport because it offers greater long-term benefits.

To initiatiate this discussion, one reason behind it is that public transport will improve the financial sector of a nation. A better transport facility will allow civilians to travel through them as contrast to their personal vehicles. However, government can also construct projects like metro buses through which they can earn ROI. For instance, government of Pakistan facilitate their members of society with orange line buses. Individuals use them on a peak level through which both parties got beneficial.

On the flip side of a coin, there is a school of thought that investing on the railway lines is more essential. One crucial reason is that it consume a lot of time because railways track are limited. Furthermore, train can't go in every tiny town or villiage. Consequently, a large proportion of the civilians don't travel just because of it.

According to my perspective, government should must invest their money on the public transport because this will also reduce the traffic pollution.With the passage of time population are increasing along with it. Which can also rise the uses of personal vehicles through which disseases like stress and air pollution came into existance. The only solution to wave off them is encourage the individuals to travel through public transport and government make sure to provide the better facilities to them.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You discuss both proposed uses of funding and state a clear preference for improving public transport, especially in the introduction and conclusion. The points about reducing reliance on private vehicles and pollution are relevant, and the Orange Line example gives the argument some support. However, the two sides are not developed equally: the case for high-speed rail is reduced mainly to limited routes and travel time, without explaining how faster intercity connections could benefit passengers or the economy. Some claims, such as public transport improving the “financial sector,” are also unclear or insufficiently explained. Develop each view with a specific cause-and-effect explanation and make the comparison behind your opinion more explicit.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable overall structure: an introduction, a paragraph for each view, and a concluding opinion. Signposting such as “On the flip side” helps readers follow the shift between arguments, and the conclusion returns to your position. However, some links are mechanical or do not clearly express the relationship between ideas. For example, “To initiate this discussion, one reason behind it is that” is vague, while “Which can also rise the uses…” is a sentence fragment that interrupts the progression. References such as “through them” and “both parties” are not always clear. Use more direct topic sentences and ensure each sentence connects logically to the one before it.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You attempt a range of topic-related vocabulary, including “railway tracks,” “public transport,” “traffic pollution,” and “personal vehicles,” so the main subject is clear. There are also efforts to use less common expressions, but several choices are inaccurate or unnatural and sometimes make the intended meaning difficult to follow. Examples include “financial sector” for the benefit being described, “travel through them,” and “wave off” pollution. Spelling errors such as “belive,” “amont,” “villiage,” and “existance” are noticeable. Aim for precise, natural collocations rather than elaborate phrases, and proofread spelling and word forms. This would make your ideas easier to understand and give your vocabulary more control.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You use both simple and complex sentence forms, including a concession in the introduction (“Although both views have valid arguments”) and a relative clause beginning “through which.” However, control is inconsistent, particularly in longer sentences. For example, “government should must invest” combines incompatible modal forms, and “Which can also rise the uses…” is a fragment rather than a complete sentence. There are also agreement and verb-form problems in “it consume,” “government … facilitate,” and “both parties got beneficial.” Punctuation is sometimes missing, as in “traffic pollution.With.” Work on complete sentence boundaries, subject–verb agreement, and choosing one correct modal or verb construction at a time.

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.