Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Barron's Writing · 2026-10-23

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

Using a cell phone while driving is dangerous because it causes the driver to become distracted. Therefore, cell phone use by drivers should be made illegal.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Give reasons for your answer, and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Student answer (Band 6.5)

Some people think that using a smartphone while driving can be dangerous because it can disctract the driver and for that reason the use of smartphones while driving should be made illegal. I strongly agree with this affirmation, drivers should only focus on the road and minimizing distractions is the right way to prevent accidents and death on roads.

Although some people argue that they can use their cellphone for a quick check on the gps or to answer a message and this not affect their attention, the lack of focus while driving is one of the main causes of accidents and death that happens on the roads. Driver should only be focused on the cars nearby and the pedestrians, because a moment of distraction can cause a major accident or can cause a pedestrian to be run over. Somes recent studies argues that the use of cellphones causes more deaths on roads than drinking and driving.

The prohibition of cellphones while driving should be incentivised in more countries and applying fines to those who disrespect law should be implemented. For instance, in Australia there are traffic cameras that can fine drivers that uses smartphones and the fines reach almost a thousand dollars in some cases. Therefore, this direct financial impact discourages repeat offenses of drivers.

To sum up, I strongly agree with the prohibition of cellphones while driving, because this will increase the attention and awarness of the drives on the road, and therefore making the roads more safe and it can reduce the number of death caused by accidents.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

Your position is clear from the introduction—“I strongly agree”—and remains consistent in the conclusion. You address the central issue by explaining how phone use distracts drivers, describing possible harm to pedestrians, and supporting enforcement with the example of Australian traffic cameras and fines. These relevant points are extended enough to support your view. However, some claims are broad rather than carefully explained: the statement that phones cause “more deaths on roads than drinking and driving” is attributed vaguely to “recent studies,” and the point about checking GPS or messages could be explored more directly in relation to whether any phone use should be illegal. Developing that distinction and qualifying the evidence would make the argument more precise and fully supported.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The response has a clear overall progression: it introduces your position, explains the danger of distraction, gives an enforcement example, and concludes by restating your view. Paragraphing supports this structure, and linking expressions such as “Although,” “For instance,” and “To sum up” help readers follow the argument. The ideas within the main body are generally connected, particularly the link between loss of focus and potential accidents. At times, however, connections are somewhat mechanical or unclear. The opening sentence of the third paragraph moves from prohibition to incentives and fines without fully explaining how these measures relate. Make the relationship between each claim explicit, and use referencing such as “this policy” or “such penalties” to avoid repeating “cellphones” and “driving.”

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of vocabulary to discuss the topic, including “distracted,” “pedestrians,” “prohibition,” “financial impact,” and “repeat offenses.” These choices communicate the main ideas clearly, and the example of fines gives you an opportunity to use topic-specific language. Some word choices and collocations are inaccurate or repetitive, however: “affirmation” is not the natural term for your stated position, “incentivised” does not fit the intended meaning of making a prohibition more widely adopted, and “death on roads” is less natural than a phrase referring to road deaths. There are also spelling errors such as “disctract” and “awarness.” Aim for more precise collocations and proofread spelling so that your vocabulary sounds more natural and controlled.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, including a concession beginning “Although some people argue…” and a cause-and-effect explanation of how distraction can lead to accidents. The meaning is generally clear, but some grammatical errors remain. For example, “this not affect their attention” needs an auxiliary verb, while “Driver should only be focused” has a number-agreement problem. In “studies argues” and “drivers that uses,” the verb forms do not agree with their subjects. The final sentence also has an unclear structure after “and therefore,” making the relationship between increased attention and safer roads awkward. Review subject–verb agreement, auxiliary verbs, and sentence construction, especially when joining several ideas.

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.