Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-11-10

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

Some people have decided to reduce the number of times they fly every year or to stop flying altogether.

Do you think the environmental benefits of this development outweigh the disadvantages for individuals and businesses?

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

Student answer (Band 5.0)

Every year hundreds of flights took off from the airport and people fly from one place to another for different purposes. If people fly every year or multiples time so, definitely it is harmful for environment or they don't fly or less fly so, it is loss for their businesses or other things.

To begin with, if people wants to reduce their fly time so, it is a positive developments for environment. For instance, when number of flights reduce automatically air pollution is also reduced. It is also a positive impact on climate change. In addition, it is also excellent for fuel consumption and fuel price may be reduce by government. Aeroplanes have also enough time for repairing.

Moreover, it is also a major loss for businesses and individuals because when they don't fly definitly, they are not able to attend their businesses meetings and the individuals also miss their tour which they decided with their family.

From my perspective, people reduce their fly time it also decrease the air pollution or clean the environment but i think it is not suitable for business man and a individuals because they face the major disadvantage of this thing. For instance, one of friends, always travel many time but a few days ago he reduce the time of fly however, he face major loss due to decrease flight time.

In conclusion, people have decided to reduce number of times they fly it is good for environment and which clean the atmosphere and other side people faces the major loss when they don't enough fly.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

You address both sides of the question and give a clear preference in the final body paragraph: you accept environmental gains but consider the disadvantages for businesspeople and individuals more important. The points about reduced pollution and missed business meetings are relevant. However, the response does not fully answer whether the benefits outweigh the disadvantages: the opening is unclear, and the conclusion mainly repeats that both outcomes exist rather than directly weighing them. Several ideas are asserted but not explained, such as how reduced flying would affect fuel prices or why your friend experienced a major loss. Develop fewer points with specific reasoning or examples, and state your comparison consistently from the introduction through to the conclusion.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, separate paragraphs for environmental and personal or business effects, and a conclusion. Linking expressions such as “To begin with,” “Moreover,” and “In conclusion” help signal these stages. However, progression within paragraphs is limited: the environmental paragraph moves from pollution to climate change, fuel prices, and aircraft repairs without explaining how the points connect. The repeated use of “also” and “because” makes cohesion mechanical, while the opening and conclusion do not clearly frame the central comparison. Improve the logical flow by grouping related ideas, using clear references to earlier points, and making each paragraph develop one main claim.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some relevant topic vocabulary, including “air pollution,” “climate change,” “fuel consumption,” and “business meetings,” so the reader can identify the main subject. However, the range is limited and several phrases are inaccurate or repetitive, which sometimes makes meaning less clear. Examples include “reduce their fly time,” “positive developments for environment,” and “major loss for businesses.” The repeated use of “fly,” “people,” and “loss” also restricts precision. Build a more varied set of accurate collocations for travel and environmental effects, and check word forms and spelling. For example, use “reduce the number of flights” rather than “reduce their fly time,” and “environmental benefit” rather than “positive developments for environment.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and longer sentences, including conditional forms such as “when they don't fly” and clauses introduced by “because.” However, complex sentences are often faulty, and frequent errors in agreement, verb forms, articles, and sentence construction can make the reader work to understand your meaning. For example, “if people wants” should be “if people want,” and “fuel price may be reduce” should be “fuel prices may be reduced.” The opening sentence also shifts awkwardly between past and present forms. Focus first on producing accurate simple sentences, then add subordinate clauses and check that subjects and verbs agree. Careful punctuation and sentence boundaries will also make your ideas easier to follow.

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.