Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-10-23

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)

Some people across the world deem it essential to spend plenty of money to construct new railway lines for intercity fast trains to make commute between cities easy. In contrast others believe that with comparatively less expenditure of money existing public transport can be improved. This essay will discuss both views before agreeing with the latter as in that way public funds can be better utilized.

The advent of modern bullet trains has made transport across regions very convenient and quick. Its supporters believe that its not only necessary to link cities with faster lines to remain ahead in the global race of modern transport but also practical as well. Fast trains means less waste of time which in turn promises more efficiency in usual tasks for both professionals and common men. For instance, the bullet trains in China travel faster than speed of sound and working professionals rely on them to reach offices in time.

On the other hand, some people consider that establishing new tracks and spending more money on development of fast trains is not mandatory. A person can reach to its destination if the urban or regional transport that could be bus or tramp is on time and covers all the areas around region. Therefore, champions of this perspective opine that governments should improve already present modes of transportation by increasing the number of vehicles and stations along with reducing the linking vehicles. For examples, the rapid bus transportation system in Pakistan is not only transporting passengers more efficiently in time but also earning plenty of revenue as compared to the meagre amount generated by Pakistan railways.

In conclusion, fast trains may be quick but not cost efficient. Hence, I believe public funds should be ideally invested in improving the existing modes of public transportion.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

You address both views and state a clear preference for improving existing transport, particularly in the introduction and conclusion. The discussion of fast trains gives relevant reasons—shorter journeys and greater efficiency—and the Pakistan example supports your preferred option. This meets the task well, but the two sides are not developed equally: the case for new rail lines is mostly general, and the claim that Chinese bullet trains travel “faster than speed of sound” is inaccurate and weakens the example. The explanation of how existing services could be improved is more specific, though “reducing the linking vehicles” is unclear. To strengthen the response further, develop the benefits and costs of each option with accurate, directly relevant examples.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The response has a clear overall progression: an introduction presents the debate and your position, two body paragraphs discuss the opposing views, and a conclusion restates your opinion. Linking expressions such as “In contrast,” “On the other hand,” and “Therefore” help readers follow the argument, and the paragraphing is appropriate. Some connections are less smooth or precise, however. For example, “Therefore” introduces a recommendation but the preceding explanation does not fully establish why increasing vehicles and stations is the best solution. The reference in “its supporters” is also slightly unclear after “bullet trains.” Aim to make each paragraph’s central claim explicit and ensure that linking phrases express the exact relationship between ideas, rather than relying mainly on familiar transitions.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of topic vocabulary, including “intercity,” “expenditure,” “efficiency,” “regional transport,” and “revenue.” These choices allow you to discuss both infrastructure and public services, and the meaning is generally clear. However, some less common expressions are inaccurate or unnatural: “plenty of money,” “remain ahead in the global race,” and “reducing the linking vehicles” do not convey the intended ideas precisely. There are also spelling and word-form slips, including “tramp” for “tram” and “transportion.” These issues do not prevent understanding, but they limit precision and naturalness. Prefer established collocations such as “invest heavily in,” “connect cities,” and “expand routes,” and check spelling and word forms during revision.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You attempt a mix of simple and complex structures, including a contrastive opening and the cause-and-effect construction “Fast trains means less waste of time which in turn promises more efficiency.” Most ideas remain understandable, but some grammatical errors recur. In that example, the plural subject “Fast trains” requires “mean”; “its not only necessary” needs “it’s”; and “A person can reach to its destination” has problems with the preposition and pronoun reference. The sentence beginning “A person can reach…” also shifts awkwardly into “that could be bus or tramp.” These are examples of errors in agreement, contractions, prepositions, and sentence construction. Review subject–verb agreement and article use, and edit complex sentences to ensure each clause has a clear subject and grammatical connection.

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.