Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-10-31

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)

Some argue government should invest in very fast inter-city railways, others say improve existing public transport is better.This essay will discuss both views before concluding that improving existing systems should be prioritized, though high-speed rail has merits.

On the one hand, citiznes who argued that contructions of fast trains is highly valuable. this statement has advantages. Initially it saves time, when bullet trains are made individual can reach to the destination in few hours. For example, individuals who travel from karachi to Islamabad it take 8 to 10 hours. Another reason that support to this idea is that it is environmental friendly, which help to reduce the pollution, and lastly construction of railways line open the work opportunities for many labours.

On the other hand, who support the idea existing public transport should b upgraded has many strong merit. Firtsly, citizens do not travel from city to coty on a daily basis they use public transport when they go the market, shopping mall or univeristy so government should give fist priority to public transport. when more public transport is made it reduces traffic congestion, pollution in cities, less crowded, more punctual. Building new high-speed line costs billion dollars. Upgrading existing network is cheaper and gives quick result.

From my perspective, in developing countries / limited budget, first fix the current broken system. High-speed rail is a luxury project. Balanced approach, but priority must be existing transport. Later, revenue can fund fast trains.My view is Improving existing public transport is more equitable and practical.

While high-speed rail is economically and environmentally attractive for long-term, improving existing transport offers immediate relief to majority.So government should prioritize upgrading existing transport.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You address both sides of the discussion and state a consistent preference for improving existing transport, especially in the opening and conclusion. Relevant reasons include faster journeys and employment from new railways, and affordability, congestion relief, and wider everyday use for existing services. The Karachi–Islamabad example helps illustrate the time-saving point. However, several claims are asserted rather than explained: for instance, the environmental benefit of high-speed rail and the claim that upgraded transport will be more punctual would benefit from a brief explanation or example. The view that high-speed rail may be funded later is also introduced but not developed. Develop these points more evenly and make the comparison between the two investments more explicit.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, separate paragraphs for each view, and a concluding preference. This makes the overall argument easy to follow. The signposts “On the one hand” and “On the other hand” help distinguish the positions, and the final paragraph returns to your main view. However, cohesion is sometimes mechanical, with repeated sequencing phrases such as “Initially,” “Another reason,” and “Firtsly.” Some transitions between ideas are abrupt, particularly the shift from the balanced approach to “My view is Improving…” and then the final recommendation. Combine these points into a more unified conclusion, and use clearer referencing and linking so each reason follows naturally from the previous one.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant topic vocabulary, including “high-speed rail,” “traffic congestion,” “limited budget,” and “revenue,” which allows you to discuss the issue directly. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “priority” and “equitable.” However, spelling errors and inaccurate word choices are noticeable, including “citiznes,” “contructions,” “coty,” and “merit.” Some expressions are awkward or imprecise, such as “open the work opportunities,” “less crowded,” and “high-speed rail is a luxury project.” Aim for accurate collocations and more precise descriptions of benefits; proofreading spelling will also make your ideas easier to read. The vocabulary is adequate for the topic, but control is not yet consistent.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt a mixture of simple and more complex sentences, including a relative clause in “which help to reduce the pollution” and a conditional idea in “when more public transport is made it reduces traffic congestion.” The main meaning is generally recoverable, but errors in sentence structure, agreement, articles, and punctuation occur across the response. For example, “citizens who argued that constructions… is highly valuable” has an incomplete structure and mismatched verb forms, while “it take 8 to 10 hours” lacks subject–verb agreement. Several sentences begin with lowercase letters or run together without appropriate punctuation. Practise building complete clauses and checking verb agreement and sentence boundaries; greater accuracy in these areas would make your argument clearer.

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.