Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Sample Response
Governments want to ensure a safe and fast mode of transportation for their citizens and businesses. Thus many express their view that governments should focus on improving railways rather than roads. I concur with the statement and my reasons will be explained in this essay.
First, railways are safe both for citizens and merchants. The number of road accidents and highway casualties in many countries is far higher than that of railway accidents. Thus investing in a safer mode of transportation that is also fast is a much more prudent idea for any government. It is also an efficient mode of transport as rails can carry hundreds of people and several hundred tonnes of goods at a time while road transport is not built for that. For example, some shuttle trains are many times faster than those of private cars and public buses while also can carry a much higher number of passengers at a time. Thus improved railways would save valuable time while offering a safe mode of commuting for more people and businesses.
Moreover, modern rails are more environmentally friendly - and are run by green energy like solar power and electricity - while road vehicles burn fossil fuels and cause harm to the environment. Climate change is a huge concern for every government in the world, and the modern rail transportation system causes far less damage to the environment. Considering environmental benefits, governments should invest in railways rather than roads. For instance, many developing countries in Europe have invested heavily in developing their train system and reduced carbon emissions as a result of this initiative.
In conclusion, I believe that a government - either in a developed or a developing country - should invest in building a safer, faster, greener and more reliable transportation system, and the railway, for this reason, should get an obvious priority.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use definite view noun Original: their Suggested revision: the Why it matters: The sentence refers to the specific view stated immediately afterward, so the definite article is clearer.
- 2. Correct both placement Original: safe both for citizens and merchants Suggested revision: safe for both citizens and merchants Why it matters: “Both” should appear directly before the two coordinated beneficiaries.
- 3. Clarify numerical comparison Original: that of railway accidents Suggested revision: the number of railway accidents Why it matters: Repeating the comparison noun removes the unclear singular pronoun reference.
- 4. Name transport vehicles Original: rails Suggested revision: trains Why it matters: Trains carry passengers and goods, whereas rails are the tracks they travel on.
- 5. State capacity directly Original: road transport is not built for that Suggested revision: road transport cannot match this capacity Why it matters: The revision expresses the comparison in capacity more precisely and formally.
- 6. Fix comparison objects Original: than those of private cars and public buses Suggested revision: than private cars and public buses Why it matters: The trains are compared directly with the vehicles, so the pronoun “those” and “of” are unnecessary.
- 7. Use parallel participle Original: while also can carry Suggested revision: while also carrying Why it matters: The reduced clause after “while” needs a present participle to share the subject “trains.”
- 8. Use concise quantity phrase Original: a much higher number of passengers Suggested revision: far more passengers Why it matters: The shorter expression conveys the same comparison more directly.
- 9. Correct commuting beneficiary Original: businesses Suggested revision: goods Why it matters: People commute and goods are transported, whereas businesses themselves do not commute.
- 10. Name railway systems Original: rails Suggested revision: railways Why it matters: “Railways” refers to the transport systems, while “rails” refers only to the metal tracks.
- 11. Use plural rail term Original: their train system Suggested revision: their rail systems Why it matters: The plural and broader term suit the reference to multiple countries’ transport networks.
- 12. Use concise transport phrase Original: safe and fast mode of transportation Suggested revision: safe and rapid form of transport Why it matters: The revision is more concise and uses “rapid” more naturally for transport speed.
Suggested Rewrites
- their the
- safe both for citizens and merchants safe for both citizens and merchants
- that of railway accidents the number of railway accidents
- rails trains
- road transport is not built for that road transport cannot match this capacity
- than those of private cars and public buses than private cars and public buses
Why this response received Band 7.5
The response maintains a clear position and develops two persuasive lines of reasoning around safety, capacity, and environmental impact, supported by relevant examples. Its main limitation is occasional imprecision in examples and phrasing, which slightly weakens an otherwise coherent argument. The highest-priority improvement is to make comparisons more exact and qualify broad claims, particularly those about rail energy sources and national investment outcomes.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
The response directly answers the question with a consistent position and develops relevant safety, efficiency, and environmental reasons in depth.
Strengthen the case further by qualifying broad factual examples and briefly explaining why railway priority remains justified despite continuing road needs.
Coherence and Cohesion
The essay is logically organised into focused paragraphs, and cohesive devices guide the reader clearly without obscuring progression.
Refine links within the main body so closely related claims about safety, speed, and capacity form an even smoother chain of reasoning.
Lexical Resource
A sufficiently flexible range of transport and environmental vocabulary conveys the argument precisely overall, despite a few awkward or imprecise choices.
Use more exact terms such as rail services, rail passengers, and clear priority, and avoid treating electricity itself as necessarily green energy.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
Complex and simple structures are used with generally strong control, though a few comparative and clause constructions are awkward or incomplete.
Check comparison structures and subject insertion in clauses, for example writing while they can also carry rather than while also can carry.
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
Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.