Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 12 · 2026-11-03

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

Today more and more tourists are visiting places where conditions are difficult, such as the Sahara desert or the Antarctic.

What are the benefits and disadvantages for tourists who visit such places?

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

 

Student answer (Band 5.0)

Nowadays, it is a trend to visit places with difficult conditions which are unfavourable. These vacations can easily turn dangerous. In my opinion these places are not for tourists it can be used for scientific researches. It has decades of years of work before it could become tourist destinations.

These places like Sahara desert or the Antarctic are very beautiful but it is natural, almost untouched and has a biological balance in the ecosystem. Tourist leave carbon footprint when they are being transported through vehicles. They leave trash which needs to be cleaned, in such places there is hardly any labour available. It could be life threatening if something goes wrong they accidently get stuck or there an unexpected heavy snow blizzare. It can interrupt there vacation, now they might be stuck because of unfavourable weather. Eventually they might run out of basic needs like food and water. These places are not for tourists it can be used for scientific research as it has many years before it can become a tourist destination.

Although, tourists visting such places are exploring new part of the world and the scenaries are breath taking. Is a vacation worth our lives if something goes wrong? Ofcourse not . As it is adverse environment with shortage of resources and facilities. If a tourist gets a simple fracture he won't be able to get it fixed in Antartic as there is no medical facility, he would have to rushed to other continents.

Overall, we won't be able to enjoy places where conditions are difficult, such as the Sahara desert or the Antarctic right now. Once these places have become tourist friendly after a decade, then it would be a perfect tourist spot.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

You address the topic by discussing environmental harm and safety risks, and you acknowledge a benefit: tourists can explore unfamiliar places and enjoy their scenery. However, the response focuses much more on disadvantages, while the benefit is only briefly stated and not supported with an example or explanation. Your position—that these destinations are not currently suitable for tourists—is clear in places, but it shifts toward saying they may become suitable after a decade without explaining what would need to change. Develop both sides more evenly and support each main point with a specific example. The 13 words copied from the task prompt are excluded from the authoritative count.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0

The response has a basic paragraph structure, moving from your position to risks, a brief benefit, and a conclusion. Some ideas are linked with phrases such as “Although” and “Overall,” but progression is not consistently clear: the claim that these places should be used for scientific research is repeated, and the final paragraph introduces the idea of becoming tourist-friendly after a decade without developing it. Several sentences are joined awkwardly, such as “They leave trash which needs to be cleaned, in such places there is hardly any labour available,” making the relationship between points unclear. Group related risks together, give the benefits their own developed paragraph, and use clear referencing and transitions rather than repeating the same claim.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use some relevant topic vocabulary, including “carbon footprint,” “biological balance,” “adverse environment,” and “shortage of resources and facilities.” This gives you a useful foundation for discussing remote destinations. However, the range is limited and some word choices or forms are inaccurate or unnatural, such as “scientific researches,” “scenaries,” and “tourist friendly.” Spelling errors including “blizzare,” “Antartic,” and “Ofcourse” are also noticeable. These do not prevent the reader from understanding your main points, but they reduce precision and control. Build a wider set of accurate expressions for environmental impact, exploration, and emergency services, and check spelling and collocations carefully.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt some complex structures, for example, “Although, tourists visiting such places are exploring new part of the world,” and use conditional language in “if something goes wrong.” However, the range is limited, and errors occur frequently enough to make some sentences difficult to follow. Examples include the run-on “In my opinion these places are not for tourists it can be used for scientific researches,” the missing subject in “he would have to rushed,” and unclear agreement or reference in “Tourist leave carbon footprint.” Punctuation also needs attention, particularly where separate clauses are joined with commas. Practise forming complete sentences with clear subjects and verbs, and check articles, plurals, and verb forms.

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.