Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-10-26

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 5.0)

Few of the people thinks that spend a lot of fund on constructing railway lines for fast traveling is beneficial, in contrast, some individuals belive that money should be spent on escalating public transport. This essay intends to analyse both views as far as I am concerned , I am in a favour of former notion.

To commence with, the amount of expenditure of increasing railway lines is good for distinct ways. To explain it, trains decreases a lot of public transport and also reduces the air pollution. For example, train transport reduces many public accident and heavy traffic. For result, many places are now unpolluted and full of purity.

From the another view, money spent on improving public transport is also a best way to develop our country. To explain it, public transport provides a positive development on taking a large space and also reduces talking risks on general class. It also help us to moving 24/7. To cite an example, people learnt driving and make confident.

According to my opinion, trains are more useful than public transport and also valuable for our environment.

To conclude, population who believes on railways transport are good for pollution and save petrol whilst the rest who consider public transport is support to more safety and punctuality.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

You identify both positions and state your preference for the first view: “I am in a favour of former notion.” However, the discussion only partially fulfils the task because the reasons are brief, unclear, or not convincingly connected to the benefits of either investment. For instance, the claim that trains reduce “public transport” does not explain the intended advantage, while the point about learning to drive does not clearly support improving public transport. Your conclusion repeats the two sides but does not reinforce a well-supported opinion. The response is also 36 words below the required minimum, leaving limited space to develop relevant examples and explain your reasoning. Expand each main point with a clear explanation and a directly relevant example.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, separate paragraphs for the two views, your opinion, and a conclusion. Linking phrases such as “To commence with,” “From the another view,” and “To conclude” help signal these stages. However, progression within paragraphs is often difficult to follow because ideas are not clearly connected or explained. For example, the first body paragraph moves from railway expenditure to pollution, accidents, traffic, and “purity” without showing how each point relates. Some transitions also sound mechanical, and the opinion paragraph interrupts the flow before the conclusion. Organise each body paragraph around one main reason, then use a clear explanation and example to develop it; ensure references such as “the former notion” are unambiguous.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You attempt topic-related vocabulary, including “constructing railway lines,” “air pollution,” “public transport,” and “traffic,” and you use some less common expressions such as “expenditure.” However, the range is limited and several inaccurate word choices or collocations make meaning unclear. “Trains decreases a lot of public transport” does not express a clear benefit, and “taking risks on general class” is difficult to interpret. There are also spelling errors, including “belive,” and unnatural phrases such as “full of purity.” Aim for precise, natural combinations rather than more elaborate wording: for example, explain that rail investment can reduce road congestion or emissions. Check spelling and choose vocabulary that directly expresses your intended point.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You use both simple statements and attempts at longer structures, including “Whilst the rest who consider public transport…” and “To explain it…,” but the range is limited and complex attempts are often faulty. Agreement errors appear in “Few of the people thinks” and “trains decreases,” while verb forms are incorrect in “It also help us to moving.” Article and preposition patterns are also problematic, as in “From the another view” and “in a favour of.” These errors sometimes make the intended meaning hard to follow. Practise building accurate subject–verb–object sentences first, then add subordinate clauses. Pay particular attention to subject–verb agreement, infinitive forms after “help,” and article use; proofread punctuation and spacing as well.

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.