Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 21 · 2026-09-17

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

The best way to provide enough homes in large cities is to build tall apartment blocks.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

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

Student answer (Band 5.0)

In many modern cities, the populaion is very high. There is much more need of living places. Tall apartments are the best option in large cities to provide enough homes to people. I am strongly agree with this.

On the one hand, tall apartments provide many homes to many people in small place. We need alot of land for the homes in cities. If we built tall buildings in cities it does not consume more place. Many people live at one place in tall buildings. It saves the land more. It saves the time and money also. This helps keep housing affordable for all. People can live near their workshops, job and their education institutes. Hundreds of people can live at one small place.

However, tall apartments can save the land and property in large cities. Because proverty is very expensive in large cities, everyone cannot afford the high amount of the land. That's why it is a good option in large cities. Tall apartsments can save the water. If we make our buildings vertically, it can save the land more. And we have extra space to build companies and work places. By this, many people get more opportunities of jobs. Anemployment can be reduce. Tall buildings should make in the city centre so that, people can has easily access to transport like buses.

In the conclusion, tall apartments are very good option to provide enough homes to people in large cities. It can save the land and improve the financial status of the countries.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5

The candidate addresses the prompt by clearly stating their position that tall apartment blocks are the best option for large cities ("I am strongly agree with this"). Ideas are presented throughout the response, focusing on land conservation, housing affordability, and proximity to amenities. However, the development of these ideas is repetitive and limited. For instance, the notion that tall buildings "save the land" is repeated multiple times across paragraphs without much extension into deeper implications or alternative viewpoints. Furthermore, some arguments wander into peripheral points, such as mentioning unemployment and job opportunities without strongly tying them back to the core question of housing provision. Consequently, the task is addressed, but the support remains somewhat basic, corresponding to a Band 5.5 performance.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0

The response attempts to use basic paragraphing, separating the introduction, body points, and conclusion, though the second body paragraph confusingly starts with "However," despite agreeing with the previous paragraph. Cohesive devices are used, but they are often mechanical and repetitive (e.g., beginning multiple sentences with "It saves..." or "Tall apartments can..."). Referencing is sometimes unclear, and the overall progression lacks a smooth flow, jumping between housing, land costs, water, jobs, and transport without strong transitional links. While there is an overall attempt at organisation, the inadequate and sometimes inaccurate use of cohesive devices places this response securely at Band 5.0.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.0

The vocabulary used is limited and repetitive, with frequent reliance on basic words such as "homes," "cities," "land," and "people." There are several noticeable word choice and collocation errors, such as "populaion" (spelling), "living places" instead of living spaces or housing, "alot" (spelling/spacing), "proverty is very expensive" instead of property prices are high, and "people can has easily access." The attempt to use less common vocabulary like "vertically" and "financial status" is offset by persistent lexical inaccuracies that occasionally cause strain for the reader, fitting the Band 5.0 descriptors.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0

The essay displays a mix of simple and attempting-at-complex sentence forms, but control is weak. There are frequent grammatical errors, such as "I am strongly agree" (incorrect auxiliary usage with an adjective/verb hybrid), "If we built tall buildings" (mixed conditional/tense error), "Anemployment can be reduce" (passive voice error), and "tall buildings should make" (active/passive confusion). Punctuation and article usage also show frequent lapses. These errors occur throughout the text and cause some difficulty, though the meaning can generally be deciphered, which aligns with Band 5.0.

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.