In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Sample Response
People, in some countries, advocate for having a fast and extensive rail transportation system while others think that improving the existing road transport is far more important and deserves a bigger chunk of the budget. This essay discusses both views. Personally, I am in favour of developing and enhancing both.
On the one hand, people in favour of having a speedy and reliable train communication system say that trains can carry a large number of passengers and a huge volume of goods at a time, and can remarkably reduce traffic congestion. Rail communication is safer and faster, and can connect cities and towns that build better links than the conventional road transport system. Furthermore, locomotives are already popular in many countries and have greatly improved the communication sector. Due to such advantages, people often opine that more money should be allocated for constructing new fast train lines. For instance, the train systems in China and Russia both have a groundbreaking contribution to improving their overall communication systems, and many other countries have started adopting this model.
On the other hand, others think that public transport plays an essential role in interconnecting the different parts of the cities and most people use this system to travel to different places. Though trains can improve the city transport facilities, it is not an alternative to the existing road transport. That is why the national budget should be utilised for improving public transport for the sake of better communication for mass people. For instance, the train line in the UK has always contributed to a great extent to the overall transport system in the country. Nevertheless, public transport has always been the main commuting mode for UK citizens.
In my opinion, the authority should focus on enhancing and improving the existing public transport system while also developing a fast and vast network of trains so that the different parts of the country become connected. It would be useful to reduce the commute time for passengers while also contributing to national economic growth.
To conclude, if the national budget is fairly distributed for the improvement of the fast and new rail system as well as public transport for the overall expansion and improvement of the transportation system in a country, it will bring more favourable results for the country.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Remove interrupting commas Original: People, in some countries, Suggested revision: People in some countries Why it matters: The location phrase directly identifies the people and does not need to be set off by commas.
- 2. Use concise verb pattern Original: advocate for having Suggested revision: advocate developing Why it matters: Advocate followed by a gerund expresses this proposal more directly.
- 3. Keep transport category accurate Original: improving the existing road transport Suggested revision: improving existing public transport Why it matters: Public transport is the broader system named in the task, whereas road transport narrows the meaning.
- 4. Use transport term Original: train communication system Suggested revision: rail transport system Why it matters: Rail transport system is the standard term for a network of passenger and freight trains.
- 5. Improve adverb choice Original: remarkably Suggested revision: significantly Why it matters: Significantly is the natural academic collocation for describing a substantial reduction.
- 6. Name the correct sector Original: communication sector Suggested revision: transport network Why it matters: The discussion concerns physical transportation rather than the communication sector.
- 7. Correct preposition pattern Original: for Suggested revision: to Why it matters: Allocated takes to before the activity receiving the money.
- 8. Correct contribution collocation Original: have a groundbreaking contribution to improving Suggested revision: have made a major contribution to improving Why it matters: English uses make a contribution, and major is more suitable than groundbreaking here.
- 9. Use natural public term Original: communication for mass people Suggested revision: transport for the general public Why it matters: The revised phrase names the service and its users in natural formal English.
- 10. Use plural institution Original: authority Suggested revision: authorities Why it matters: Authorities is the usual plural noun for the public bodies responsible for national transport policy.
- 11. Use formal budget phrase Original: bigger chunk of the budget Suggested revision: larger share of the budget Why it matters: Larger share is more precise and suitably formal for an academic discussion of spending.
- 12. Specify both priorities Original: developing and enhancing both Suggested revision: developing new railways and improving existing public transport Why it matters: The revision replaces the vague reference both with the two transport priorities already discussed.
Suggested Rewrites
- People, in some countries, People in some countries
- advocate for having advocate developing
- improving the existing road transport improving existing public transport
- train communication system rail transport system
- remarkably significantly
- communication sector transport network
Why this response received Band 7.0
The response is clearly organised, considers both spending priorities, and states a consistent preference for investment in both systems. Its main weakness is that the case for existing public transport is less precise and sometimes confused with road or rail transport, which weakens the comparison. The highest priority is to distinguish the two options accurately and develop each with specific, logically matched evidence.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
Both views and the writer's opinion are addressed, but the discussion of existing public transport is less fully and accurately developed.
Clarify what existing public transport includes and support that view with an example that does not shift back to railway investment.
Coherence and Cohesion
Clear paragraphing and a logical discussion structure make the argument easy to follow, despite some repetition and mechanical signposting.
Use more concise transitions and reduce repeated wording so that the reasoning, rather than the signposts, drives progression.
Lexical Resource
Vocabulary is varied enough to discuss infrastructure, budgets, congestion, and economic effects, although several collocations are imprecise or unnatural.
Choose more natural phrases such as rail network, make a major contribution, and the general public.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
The response uses a good range of complex structures with generally sound control, while occasional agreement and modifier problems remain noticeable.
Check long sentences for precise modifier attachment, pronoun reference, and agreement before finalising the response.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Writing Task 2
In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.