Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 13 · 2026-10-07

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

In some areas of the US, a 'curfew' is imposed, in which teenagers are not allowed to be out of doors after a particular time at night unless they are accompanied by an adult.

What is your opinion about this?

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

 

Student answer (Band 6.5)

In some parts of the US, a curfew is imposed on children under 16 in which they are restricted to go outside after a particular time at night. However, in some circumstances they can step out of their house under an adult's supervision. I think it is a very thoughtful gesture, and I completely support this opinion. Let us delve deep into the aforementioned view in the subsequent paragraphs with some relevant examples.

First and foremost, imposing such restrictions on teenagers will not only ensure their safety, but it will also save them from indulging in bad habits. To illustrate, going alone at night can be dangerous for everyone especially for children, because it can be extremely dark outside especially during winter or severe weather conditions. So it is not advisable to be out of doors after 7 or 8 p.m. unless they are accompanied by their elder sibling or parents. Moreover, many children are ought to be indulged in bad addictions such as drinking, drugs, theft or can commit wrong activities in bad company of friends. For example, if a city notices an increase in theft or violence late at night, imposing a curfew on teenagers can reduce their exposure to dangerous situations and prevent them from committing criminal activities.

Furthermore, by setting limitations on teenagers at night can bring out certain positive outcomes. Primarily, teenagers can get the opportunity to spend the quality time with their family and siblings. Since most of the parent's time is usually spent at work, night time offers them to interact effectively with each other, and family members can enjoy dinner together at the same table. In addition, children can utilize the evening time in learning valuable skills such as cooking, painting, art and digital skills, which will be extremely useful for their future life and career.

To encapsulate, it can be concluded that imposing the regulations on children's outing at night can save them from potential danger and inappropriate behavior. Instead, children should be encouraged to stay at home at night, and this time can be used in interacting with family members and participate in useful indoor activities.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

Your position is clear from the introduction—“I completely support this opinion”—and remains consistent in the conclusion. You address the main issue with relevant reasons: protecting teenagers from danger and harmful behaviour, and encouraging family interaction and useful indoor activities. The examples about late-night theft and family dinners help explain these points. This is a well-supported response overall. To make the discussion more fully developed, qualify broad claims such as teenagers being likely to develop addictions or commit crimes, and explain more directly why a legal curfew is preferable to parental guidance or other measures. The point about learning skills at home is relevant, but its connection to the curfew’s benefits could be made more explicit.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction stating your view, two body paragraphs presenting distinct reasons, and a concise conclusion. Ideas progress logically, and signposts such as “First and foremost,” “Furthermore,” and “To encapsulate” make the organisation easy to follow. Examples are generally placed beside the claims they support. However, some linking language feels formulaic, particularly “Let us delve deep into the aforementioned view in the subsequent paragraphs,” which adds little to the argument. Within the first body paragraph, safety and criminal behaviour are joined under one broad point; clearer separation or a more explicit link between them would improve progression. Use referencing and transitions to show relationships between ideas rather than relying mainly on set phrases.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of vocabulary for the topic, including “imposing such restrictions,” “adult’s supervision,” “potential danger,” and “inappropriate behavior.” These choices communicate your position clearly, and some less common expressions show an effort to vary your language. At times, however, word choice and collocation are inaccurate or unnatural: “bad addictions,” “commit wrong activities,” and “spend the quality time” do not sound idiomatic. “Delve deep into the aforementioned view” is also overly formal for this essay. Such slips do not prevent understanding, but they limit precision and naturalness. Prefer straightforward, accurate phrases, and check whether verbs and nouns commonly occur together before using more elaborate wording.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, including the contrast introduced by “However,” the conditional example beginning “if a city notices,” and the reason clause with “Since.” Most sentences remain understandable, and punctuation generally helps the reader follow the argument. Some grammatical errors are present, though they rarely obscure meaning. For example, “by setting limitations … can bring out” lacks a clear grammatical subject, while “many children are ought to be indulged” has an incorrect verb construction. In “night time offers them to interact,” the verb pattern is also faulty. Review subject–verb structure and verb complementation, and proofread longer sentences to ensure each clause has a clear subject and a correctly formed verb.

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.