Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · IELTS Summit Mastery · 2026-09-13

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

Tourism is one of the fastest growing industries and contributes a great deal to economies around the world. However, the damage tourism can cause to local cultures and the environment is often ignored.

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 5.0)

In this complex world, this is the a hot topic for discussion is about tourism is a massive global industry that boosts economics, but the harm it brings to nature and local traditions is often ignored. Many people see the cash flow and forgot the harm done by the local areas. I agree that the damage to nature and culture is real and often ignored .

Tourism hurts local nature and the environment. Visitirs often litter in parks and ruin nature trials. More hotels and roads destroy forests and animal homes. People ignore local rules, which harms ancient sites. Resources like water run out fast because hotels use too much.

Tourism also changea and harm the local cultures. Scared traditions turn into cheap shows for money. Local people may lose their unique identity to please visitors. Traditional clothes and art become commercial items. Foreign ways replace local habits and native values fade away.

It is justified to say that the crowd wich came from across the world we do not know but we take care care of our city from there kind of visitor because as we talked about this they think that other city is dustbin and lets polute and distroy in terms of nature, environment.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.0

The response addresses the prompt by discussing the negative impacts of tourism on local cultures and the environment, and the writer clearly states a position agreeing with the statement in the introduction ('I agree that the damage to nature and culture is real'). However, the response has a significant issue with task length. As noted in the instructions, the essay is only 207 words long, falling well short of the 250-word minimum. This lack of length forces a penalty under Task Achievement because the ideas cannot be fully developed. Body paragraphs remain relatively brief, and the conclusion dissolves into a somewhat unfocused and repetitive sentence rather than a proper summary. Therefore, the task is only partially addressed in terms of scope and development, resulting in a band score of 5.0.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0

The essay displays some overall organization with a recognizable introduction, two body paragraphs focusing separately on nature and culture, and a concluding remark. However, progression is disrupted by the final sentence, which is convoluted and difficult to follow ('It is justified to say that the crowd wich came from across the world we do not know...'). Paragraphing is attempted, but transitions between ideas are sometimes mechanical or abrupt. Cohesive devices are basic and occasionally misused, as seen in the confusing referencing in the concluding paragraph. Overall, the arrangement provides a basic structure, but cohesion is faulty, aligning with a band 5.0.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.0

The vocabulary used is generally basic and repetitive. Phrases like 'massive global industry', 'cash flow', and 'cheap shows' communicate basic meanings, but the range is limited. There are several vocabulary errors and inappropriate word choices, such as 'economics' instead of 'economies', 'Visitirs' (misspelling), 'nature trials' instead of 'nature trails', and 'changea' instead of 'changes'. Furthermore, the writer invents or uses awkward phrasing like 'scared traditions' (likely meaning 'sacred traditions') and 'polute and distroy'. These noticeable errors and limited lexical flexibility mean the performance fits the band 5.0 descriptors.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0

The writer attempts a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, but control over grammar is weak. There are frequent errors in tense usage, agreement, and punctuation. Examples include 'this is the a hot topic for discussion is about tourism is', which contains multiple grammatical collisions. The phrase 'who forgot the harm done by the local areas' shows poor prepositional use. The final sentence is a massive, run-on structure laden with grammatical errors and awkward clauses ('the crowd wich came... we do not know...'). Because frequent errors cause difficulty for the reader and accurate complex structures are rare, a band score of 5.0 is appropriate.

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.