Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 21 · 2026-09-21

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 5.5)

It is believed that enough homes can be build in major cities through construction of sky-scrapers. I strongly agree to this arguement because in a little space more people can be adjusted.

The heights occupying a small space yet plenty of people can live in it. As the population increases, we become short of lands. More and more people trying to live in urban areas due to plenty of job oppurtunities and other basic facilities of life. For instance, in my town, many people migrated to cities due to law and order situation. So, how to settle all those? You will definitely need a solution and easy way to this problem is to build high rising building blocks that resides more than 100 families at a time.

Secondly, you will have more free land for other useful means. For example, agricultural purposes. The tall apartments provide you more free space for this. In addition, nowadays the owners of heights bring all the necessities under one roof like gym, spa, clubs, swimming pools, shopping markets etc that help residents to enjoy these perks at their door step.

In contrast, there are some disadvantages of these projects as well. For example, if these are not built stronger, there will be a chance of collapse or other natural disasters that can result in mass casualties. Moreover, these can badly impact over environment by blocking the sun rays and disturbing air quality.

In a nutshell, tall buildings prove beneficial but sometimes it may cause substantial damage.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.0

The student addresses all parts of the task by taking a clear and direct position in the introduction ("I strongly agree to this arguement"). The ideas presented are relevant to the prompt, discussing both the benefits of accommodating growing populations in smaller footprints and freeing up land, as well as acknowledging drawbacks like structural risks and environmental impacts. However, the development of these ideas remains somewhat limited and superficial. For instance, the argument that "more people can be adjusted" and the mention of town migration lack deeper elaboration and more sophisticated real-world examples. Additionally, the phrase "heights occupying a small space" is confusingly phrased and shows under-developed argumentation. Overall, the response meets the criteria for Band 6 because it addresses all parts of the task with relevant ideas, though some parts are under-developed.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.0

The response is arranged coherently with a recognizable overall progression. The essay opens with an introduction stating the writer's position, followed by body paragraphs discussing advantages, disadvantages, and a brief conclusion. However, cohesive devices are sometimes faulty, mechanical, or awkwardly applied. For example, transitioning phrases like "Secondly" and "In contrast" are used, but sentences within paragraphs do not always flow smoothly. The rhetorical question "So, how to settle all those?" is conversational and disrupts formal essay cohesion. Furthermore, referencing is occasionally unclear, such as the ambiguous pronoun use in "if these are not built stronger." Paragraphing is attempted, but paragraph boundaries are a bit disjointed. These issues place the response firmly at Band 5.5 to 6.0; given the clear overarching organization and functional paragraphing, Band 6.0 is appropriate.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

The student uses an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, attempting some less common items such as "substantial damage," "mass casualties," and "urban areas." However, there are notable lexical inaccuracies, awkward collocations, and word-choice errors throughout the text. Examples include "enough homes can be build" (incorrect form), "arguement" (spelling error), "more people can be adjusted" (unnatural collocation; should be accommodated), "heights occupying a small space" (misuse of 'heights' to mean high-rise buildings), and "owners of heights" (inappropriate vocabulary). Despite these errors, the vocabulary is minimally adequate to convey the writer's meaning, and communication is rarely impeded. These characteristics correspond directly to the Band 5.0 and 6.0 descriptors, aligning best with Band 5.5 due to the frequency of unnatural phrasing.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0

The student attempts a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, demonstrating some capability to construct compound and conditional sentences, such as "if these are not built stronger, there will be a chance of collapse..." However, grammatical accuracy is weak, with frequent errors in verb forms, articles, prepositions, and sentence structures. Notable errors include "homes can be build" (passive voice error), "strongly agree to this arguement" (incorrect preposition), "short of lands" (uncountable noun pluralized), "people trying to live" (fragmented clause lacking a finite verb), "high rising building blocks that resides" (subject-verb agreement error), and "impact over environment" (incorrect preposition). Because these errors are frequent and occasionally cause slight hesitation for the reader, but do not fully prevent understanding, the performance matches the Band 5.0 descriptor.

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.