Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-13

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 6.0)

Numerous people took a decision to limit or put an end to the flights they take per year. While some people believe this is better for the environment, and others firmly believe that this is damages businesses and individuals. In my view, this is a negative development for companies as it harms the balance of the economy.

Some people argue that limiting the amount of flights taken a year has positive impact on the environment as air planes produce a lot of harmful gases. These gases like carbon dioxide cause the hole in the ozone layer to expand. While this view has valid points, it overlooks the fact that traveling is almost only possible with car or plane, and cars emit as much gases as planes. However, using public transportation like planes is significantly better for the environment.

Others argue that airports make up a significant portion of a country's economy, which makes a decrease in the usage of planes a negative development. Furthermore, any downward trend in plane ticket sales effects the airport significantly. Moreover, using other means of transportation not only does it not solve the problem of global warming, but also has negative effects on individuals and businesses. Which is why I believe the advantages don't outweigh the disadvantages.

To conclude, while some argue that a limit in the number of flights may help the environment, the side effects of such development don't make up for it, making this a negative development.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You give a clear overall view that reducing flights has more disadvantages, and you address both environmental benefits and effects on businesses and individuals. The discussion of emissions is relevant, as is your point about airport revenue. However, the position is not fully consistent: you first say the change harms the economy, then argue that planes are better than cars, without clearly explaining how this supports your final judgement. The effects on individuals are mentioned but not developed, and the environmental argument relies on the questionable claim that carbon dioxide expands the ozone hole. The response is also five words below the required minimum. Develop each main point with a more accurate explanation or example, and make the comparison of benefits and disadvantages explicit.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable four-paragraph structure: an introduction, two body paragraphs presenting different arguments, and a conclusion. Linking expressions such as “Furthermore,” “Moreover,” and “To conclude” help signal the stages of the discussion. Overall, the reader can follow your position. However, some connections are mechanical or unclear. For example, “While this view has valid points” is followed by a comparison between cars and planes that does not clearly establish why flying is environmentally preferable. The sentence beginning “Which is why” is also a fragment and does not connect smoothly to the preceding point. Use clearer topic sentences and explain the relationship between each supporting idea and your conclusion.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of topic-related vocabulary, including “harmful gases,” “downward trend,” “ticket sales,” and “global warming.” These choices make the subject clear, and you attempt some more formal phrasing, such as “a significant portion of a country’s economy.” Some word choices and collocations are inaccurate or imprecise, however. “Took a decision” is less natural than “decided,” “the amount of flights” should be “the number of flights,” and “effects the airport” uses the wrong form where “affects” is needed. “The balance of the economy” is also vague. Aim for precise, natural collocations and check commonly confused forms; this will make your argument sound more controlled without requiring unnecessarily complex vocabulary.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, including contrast clauses with “While” and a relative clause in “which makes a decrease … a negative development.” Most of the meaning remains understandable, but some grammatical errors are noticeable. In the introduction, “this is damages businesses” has an incorrect verb construction; write “this damages businesses” or “this is damaging businesses.” “Which is why I believe…” is a sentence fragment, and “using other means … not only does it not solve” has an awkward, faulty structure. There are also issues with articles and number, as in “has positive impact” and “the amount of flights.” Practise checking complete sentences, verb forms, and singular/plural agreement while retaining your attempts at 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.