Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-11-02

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)

Nowadays,some people believe that it should be spend a lot of money on building new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others think that that it is batter to use that money on existing public transport by improving them. I believe that both views have some benifits

On the one hand, the people who belive on the importance of spending money on new fast trains and railway lines have a lot of argumants, one of them is most of people use bus to travel between cities this is can make a lot harms to the univeronment because they preduce a lot of carbon. For example a 100 buses make a lot of carbon then one modern train. As a result we can reduce carbon by using more trains then buses. also traffic jams is an other problem why people want to spend a lot mony on these facilities.

On the other hand, others believe that we should spend money on traditional public transports by making development on them.this is because trains mostly do not stops in a lot of places so people have to use other taxis, buses or cars to reach thier final distenations. For instance buses mostly cross through city so pasengers have the choise to stope in multiple places. Also we can devlope this public transport to electrical ones so we can reduce the harm on the enveronment .

In conclusion,I believe both views have some stong arguments, the best solution is to balance between thes importane trasport facilities also we need to develope theme.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

You discuss both proposed approaches and give a concluding view that funding should be balanced, so the response is relevant to the task. The points about emissions and traffic for fast trains, and access to more stops and electrification for existing transport, provide a basic rationale for each side. However, the position is not fully clear: the introduction says both views have benefits, while the conclusion recommends balance without explaining how that balance should be decided. Several ideas are asserted rather than developed—for example, the comparison between 100 buses and one train is not explained or supported. To strengthen the response, clarify your preferred approach and extend each main point with a specific explanation or example. The response meets the stated length requirement; the 10 words copied from the prompt were not counted.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, one paragraph for each view, and a conclusion. The signposts “On the one hand,” “On the other hand,” and “In conclusion” help readers follow the broad organisation. However, progression within paragraphs is sometimes difficult to follow because several claims are joined together without clear sentence boundaries, as in the discussion of buses, carbon emissions, and traffic jams. Linking words such as “also” and “as a result” are used, but connections between some ideas remain abrupt, and the conclusion largely repeats the introduction rather than drawing the discussion together. Use clearer sentence divisions and make each paragraph develop one central reason through explanation and an example.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some topic-related vocabulary, including “railway lines,” “carbon,” “traffic jams,” “passengers,” and “environment,” which makes the subject understandable. There are also attempts to express more specific ideas, such as “final destinations” and “electrical” transport. However, the range is limited and several spelling errors or imprecise expressions make the writing less clear, including “benifits,” “argumants,” “distenations,” and “stong arguments.” Some combinations are also unnatural, such as “make a lot of carbon” and “traditional public transports.” Build accuracy by checking spelling and learning common collocations for transport and environmental impacts. More precise wording would help you explain the comparison between transport options clearly.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex sentences, including a reason clause with “This is because” and a result clause beginning “As a result.” However, the range is limited, and errors occur frequently enough to make some sentences difficult to process. For example, “it should be spend” has an incorrect passive verb form, while “most of people use bus to travel between cities this is can make” combines clauses without correct structure or punctuation. There are also problems with agreement and sentence construction in “traffic jams is an other problem” and “trains mostly do not stops.” Practise accurate passive forms, subject–verb agreement, articles, and punctuation between independent clauses. Shorter, correctly controlled sentences would improve clarity before you add more complex structures.

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.