Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-11-04

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)

In majority of countries, citizens argue that a big chunk of budget should be spent on making new railway lines between cities for high speed trains. But some think that it should be rather spent on the already available public transport. In my opinion the money should be spent on constructing new railway lines because it will help save time and reduce the pollution.

New railway lines would help people by savinv them the time. Travel usually is very time consuming but better and fast transport system will save so much time which can be invested in other beneficial things. For example in europe people live in one city but are able to travel to the other city for their desired place of study or work because of the better and fast transport services.

When citizens of a country will have fast and reliable transport system which connects them to other cities will avoid using their own cars and they will use the public transport which will result in the less toxins in the city and it will be a big factor of reducing air and noise pollution. In switzerland the air is much cleaner comparatively because a large number of people their use public transport.

To wrap it up, I believe governments should spend more on new railway lines so people can travel easily across the country and contribute less to the pollution.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

Your position is clear: you support building new high-speed railway lines, and you give relevant reasons about saving time and reducing pollution. The examples about European travel and Switzerland also help illustrate your view. However, the task asks you to discuss both views, and the response gives almost no explanation of why governments might instead improve existing public transport—for example, to benefit more daily commuters or address overcrowding and unreliable local services. Your own reasons are also asserted more than developed, and the conclusion mainly repeats your position. The response is 16 words below the required minimum, which limits the space available to address the opposing view and support your ideas. Develop both sides with specific reasoning and examples.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, two body paragraphs and a conclusion. The ideas generally follow a sensible sequence, moving from the time-saving benefit to the environmental benefit, and phrases such as “For example” and “To wrap it up” signal examples and closure. However, the opposing view introduced in the opening is not given its own developed paragraph, so the discussion does not progress evenly through both sides of the question. Some links between ideas are also awkward or unclear, particularly the long sentence beginning “When citizens of a country will have fast and reliable transport system.” Use a clearer topic sentence for each side, connect each reason to its explanation, and make references such as “it” and “their” unambiguous.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use enough topic-related vocabulary to communicate the main ideas, including “high speed trains,” “public transport,” “reliable transport system,” and “air and noise pollution.” There are also attempts at more specific phrasing, such as “a big factor of reducing” pollution, though this collocation is not natural. Several choices are informal or imprecise for an academic essay: “a big chunk of budget,” “so much time,” and “better and fast transport services.” Spelling errors such as “savinv” and “their” where “there” is intended also reduce accuracy. Aim for more precise collocations and vary repeated words such as “fast” and “transport”; this would make the argument sound more controlled and academic.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mixture of simple and complex sentences, including a reason clause in “because it will help save time” and a relative clause in “which connects them to other cities.” The main message remains understandable, but errors occur in sentence construction and grammatical forms. For example, “In majority of countries” needs an article, while “When citizens … will have … will avoid” has an incorrect and confusing conditional structure. In “people … are able to travel to the other city,” the number and article use are awkward, and “a large number of people their use” lacks a correctly formed clause. Practise accurate conditional patterns and check articles, agreement, and sentence boundaries. More consistently controlled complex sentences would strengthen the response.

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.