Some people think it is more important to spend money on roads and motorways than on public transport systems. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Sample Response
It is argued that more funds should be allocated to roads and motorways rather than to public transport systems. I am in complete disagreement with this opinion.
On the one hand, I can understand why spending money on road networks gains the support of many people. Their view is that better road quality would increase the levels of safety and ease traffic congestion. Firstly, the better quality of motorways means a considerable decline in road mortality and injury rates. This is justifiable since the roads in some countries are fraught with holes and obstacles, plaguing people with danger and insecurity. In this sense, the amelioration of poor road infrastructures would ensure the safety of travellers. Secondly, expanding roads and building more motorways are believed to curb traffic jams. Traffic congestion is a major concern in big cities where massive numbers of vehicles travel on the road during hours of peak demand. This vexed problem could be tackled as wider roads provide maximum travel time in free-flowing traffic.
However, I would argue that spending on public transport is a better investment for a few reasons. Compared to vehicles, high-capacity public transit modes can accommodate a larger number of passengers at a time. This could be exemplified by integrated and expansive public transport networks in Australia. Recent estimates indicate that each train on Sydney’s railways removes approximately 1000 cars from its roads. Therefore, a modal shift from private to public transport would tremendously alleviate urban congestion which has been considered as one of the productivity bottlenecks in developed economies. Moreover, efficient public transport systems are a contributor to a cleaner environment. By removing cars from streets, public transit plays a pivotal role in the abatement of carbon emissions. Not only does this reduce air pollution, but it also mitigates the effects of climate change as a whole.
Based on the above-mentioned arguments, I acquiesce in the view that money should be invested in public transport systems rather than road networks.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use natural phrasing Original: in complete disagreement with Suggested revision: completely disagree with Why it matters: The verb phrase is more direct and idiomatic here.
- 2. Choose concise wording Original: increase the levels of safety Suggested revision: improve safety Why it matters: This concise collocation expresses the intended improvement more naturally.
- 3. Correct the collocation Original: mortality Suggested revision: fatality Why it matters: Fatality is the standard term for deaths caused by road accidents.
- 4. Use precise road terms Original: fraught with holes and obstacles Suggested revision: riddled with potholes and obstacles Why it matters: Potholes is more precise than holes when describing damaged roads.
- 5. Repair awkward wording Original: plaguing people with danger and insecurity Suggested revision: exposing road users to danger Why it matters: The original combination of plague, danger, and insecurity is not idiomatic in this context.
- 6. Use uncountable noun Original: infrastructures Suggested revision: infrastructure Why it matters: Infrastructure is normally uncountable when referring to a country's road system.
- 7. Use formal quantifier Original: massive Suggested revision: large Why it matters: Large numbers is the conventional formal collocation for countable vehicles.
- 8. Clarify the comparison Original: Compared to vehicles Suggested revision: Compared with private vehicles Why it matters: Specifying private vehicles makes the comparison with public transit modes precise.
- 9. Use direct verb form Original: efficient public transport systems are a contributor to Suggested revision: efficient public transport systems contribute to Why it matters: The plural subject works more naturally with the direct verb contribute.
- 10. Avoid unintended nuance Original: acquiesce in the view Suggested revision: agree with the view Why it matters: Acquiesce implies reluctant acceptance, whereas agree accurately restates the writer's firm position.
- 11. Sentence rewrite Original: This vexed problem could be tackled as wider roads provide maximum travel time in free-flowing traffic. Suggested revision: This vexed problem could be tackled because wider roads can reduce travel time by allowing traffic to flow more freely. Why it matters: Maximum travel time reverses the intended meaning, so the causal claim needs clearer wording.
Suggested Rewrites
- in complete disagreement with completely disagree with
- increase the levels of safety improve safety
- mortality fatality
- fraught with holes and obstacles riddled with potholes and obstacles
- plaguing people with danger and insecurity exposing road users to danger
- infrastructures infrastructure
Why this response received Band 8.0
The response presents a clear position and supports it with well-developed arguments about congestion, safety, capacity, and environmental impact, while maintaining strong control of complex sentence structures. Its main limitation is occasionally strained or imprecise wording, which makes some otherwise persuasive claims sound unnatural. Prioritise precise, idiomatic collocations and check that each expression conveys the intended logic exactly.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
The position is clear throughout, and both the opposing rationale and the case for public transport are relevant and substantially developed.
Strengthen the response further by ensuring every supporting claim, especially the point about wider roads and travel time, is logically exact.
Coherence and Cohesion
Ideas progress logically through well-focused paragraphs, with clear internal sequencing and effective referencing between claims.
Use a slightly less conspicuous range of sequencing expressions so the progression feels more natural and less signposted.
Lexical Resource
A wide and topic-appropriate vocabulary is evident, although several ambitious collocations are strained or imprecise.
Replace expressions such as unnatural combinations around mortality, infrastructure, and travel time with simpler, more idiomatic wording.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
The essay uses varied complex structures with strong control, and the few grammatical slips do not impede communication.
Refine article, preposition, and relative-clause choices in long sentences to achieve more consistently natural accuracy.
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
Some people think it is more important to spend money on roads and motorways than on public transport systems. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.