Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-10-22

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 6.5)

Although construction of new high speed railroads might lead to faster communication between cities, it might not prove to be fruitful if the necessity outweighs the cost of developing such railway communication systems rather than expanding on the currently available alternate public transport mediums. As a result, I believe that, investing in the development of existing public transport should be given higher priority.

Most modern countries are trying to construct new high speed railways between its commercial districts. Such a transport can reduce the daily commute time and can increase the productivity of the employees who travel such long distances to their works. For example, travelling from Tokyo to Hokkaido takes less than 30 minutes via a bullet train which is more than 6 times less amount of travelling time by any other medium. But such benefits come at several costs. Not only it requires a huge amount of initial investment for constructing such railways but also the ticket prices are too high for mass people to avail that transport to make it economically feasible. Add that to the maintenance costs for keeping it running and soon you can realize that it is too much of a hassle than providing sufficient fruitful benefits.

In contrast, expanding the already available transport sytems can prove to be far more beneificial. For instance, each country already has several public transports such as buses, coaches, ships, airplanes and also existing railways. Just by increasing the sheer number of those transports can enable people to avail them at any time without having to wait for longer periods of time with far lower prices than that of a bullet train. Although it will take more time than the faster railway, but they will have the option to choose between the fastest and the slowest medium with more flexible prices and comfort levels. Thus, the mass people will be more satisfied with the service rather than being catered to only high class people with immense wealth who can afford a ticket of a maglev or a bullet train. Moreover, by increasing the facilities of those already available transport systems, the govenments can attract more people, bringing in more revenue for the country rather than investing heavily on a completely new system which some people might never even use.

Hence, I believe that, rather than investing on a super speed railway communication system between cities, the focus should shift towards expanding and improving the currently existing transport systems for more comfortable and affordable commutes which will be more fruitful for the mass people.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You address both views and state a consistent preference for improving existing transport, especially in the introduction and conclusion. The discussion of high-speed rail includes relevant benefits, such as reduced commuting time, alongside costs, while the second body paragraph explains affordability and wider access. This meets the task well, and the Tokyo example helps illustrate the first view. However, some support is not fully developed: the specific Tokyo–Hokkaido comparison is asserted without explaining its relevance to inter-city travel generally, and the claim that adding more vehicles will reduce waiting times could be explained more carefully. To strengthen the response further, develop the practical trade-offs with clearer, more balanced examples and avoid broad claims such as “each country already has” all the listed transport modes.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The essay has a clear overall arrangement: an introduction with your position, one paragraph for each view, and a concluding restatement. Ideas generally progress logically, and linking expressions such as “For example,” “In contrast,” and “Moreover” help readers follow the argument. This is a coherent structure, though some connections feel mechanical or imprecise. For instance, “Add that to the maintenance costs” is an abrupt transition, and “Although it will take more time … but” combines two contrasting linkers in one sentence. References such as “those transports” and “that transport” are not always smooth or precise. Use a wider range of natural transitions and make each paragraph’s internal progression explicit, especially when moving from affordability to comfort and then to government revenue.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of topic vocabulary, including “high speed railways,” “initial investment,” “maintenance costs,” “flexible prices,” and “public transport systems.” These choices communicate the main ideas, and some less common expressions show an attempt to be precise. However, several word choices and collocations are inaccurate or unnatural, such as “fruitful benefits,” “mass people,” “transport mediums,” and “more than 6 times less amount of travelling time.” There are also spelling errors, including “sytems,” “beneificial,” and “govenments.” These do not prevent understanding, but they limit the naturalness and precision of the argument. Prefer established collocations and check spelling carefully; for example, use “the general public” and “travel time is less than one-sixth as long.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You attempt a mix of simple and complex structures, including concessive clauses (“Although construction … might lead…”) and paired constructions (“Not only … but also…”). Most of the argument remains understandable, but some grammatical errors recur. In the opening, “I believe that, investing” incorrectly separates the verb from its complement; write “I believe that investing…” Also, “between its commercial districts” has an unclear singular pronoun reference, and “Although it will take more time … but they will have” incorrectly combines a concessive clause with “but” and shifts from singular to plural. Articles and agreement also need attention in phrases such as “the fastest and the slowest medium.” Review clause structure, pronoun reference, and agreement to make complex sentences more consistently 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.