The proliferation of private cars on the roads in many parts of the world has led to serious problems of pollution and may contribute to global warming. Some people think that governments should spend money for the development of public transportation systems in order to help alleviate this problem. Others think it is better to spend money for the development of electric and other types of cars that may cause less pollution. Do you think it is better for governments to spend money developing public transportation or developing new kinds of cars?
Sample Response
Pollution from automobiles is a major concern in modern societyin the modern society, especially due to the increasing number of cars on the road. This is one of the major causes of climate changecauses for the climate change problem the world is facing today. To address this issue, it is better for governmentsfor the governments to build reliable and convenient public transport infrastructurea reliable and convenient public transportation infrastructure instead of spending money on the development of low-emission carspollutionless cars. Bases for my views this solution is economical and social. From an economic perspectiveFrom the economical perspective, public transportation systems are cheaper options for peoplecheaper choices for the people and affordable for all sections of societyall classes of the society. For instance, the MRT system in Singapore helps millions of people to travel comfortably and conveniently each daytravel daily with comfort and convenience. In addition, it generates revenue for the government as it requires a one-time capital investmentrequires one-time capital investment to set up a mass transportation system like a metro train system and to get a recurring income thereafter. In addition, such a transport system helps the public to save money on travelsave money in travelling and reducereducing their cost of living. From the social perspective, a public transport system helpspublic transport system helps the society in many ways. Less traffic on the roadtraffic on road means fewer accidents, and thus creates a safersafety living environment. Moreover, the roads are freely available for critical emergency services responding to fires, medical emergencies, and policing needscritical life-saving services like fire accidents, medical emergency and police operations. Also, a public transport system helps to unite all classes of people in the society by providing a uniform means of commuting. On the other hand, private vehiclesthe private vehicles, which are of different quality and cost for the rich, average and the poor, displaydisplays the economic gap within the public in society. In conclusion, even though pollutionless cars are good for the environment, a good public transport system is a better choice for its residents because it is not only environment-friendly but also accessible to everyoneaccessible for all in the community. Hence governments should spend money to develop robust public transport systems.
Why this response received Band 6.0
The response states a clear preference for public transport and develops accessible economic and social benefits with a useful Singapore example. However, much of the support concerns cost, safety, and social equality rather than the pollution problem central to the choice, while cleaner cars receive almost no direct comparison and the essay lacks paragraph breaks. Prioritise comparing how each option would reduce emissions, traffic volume, and long-term environmental harm.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
A clear position is supported by several developed benefits of public transport, but environmental comparison with cleaner cars is limited and some support is only indirectly relevant.
Compare the two options directly in terms of emissions reduction, congestion, adoption costs, and likely long-term impact.
Coherence and Cohesion
The ideas follow an understandable economic-to-social sequence and use signposting, but the single long paragraph and repeated linking phrases weaken organisation.
Create separate paragraphs for the environmental comparison, economic case, social case, and conclusion, using one focused claim in each.
Lexical Resource
A good range of transport, economic, and social vocabulary is used, though several imprecise or unnatural expressions limit lexical accuracy.
Replace phrases such as pollutionless cars, safety living environment, and roads are freely available with precise academic alternatives.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
Varied sentence structures convey the argument clearly, but errors in agreement, articles, parallel forms, and sentence construction occur regularly.
Proofread long sentences for subject-verb agreement and parallel verb patterns, especially when describing costs, benefits, and public services.
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
The proliferation of private cars on the roads in many parts of the world has led to serious problems of pollution and may contribute to global warming. Some people think that governments should spend money for the development of public transportation systems in order to help alleviate this problem. Others think it is better to spend money for the development of electric and other types of cars that may cause less pollution. Do you think it is better for governments to spend money developing public transportation or developing new kinds of cars?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.