IELTS Writing Correction Service
Writing Samples
Band 6.5

Governments should invest more in public transport than in building new roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

✍️ Want to check your own essay?Write on this topic →
Introduction
The area on which the government spends its money is a highly controversial issue. Many people argue that the funds should be allocated towards public transport development,
while
Linking Words
 others opine that it ought to be spent on building new
roads
Use synonyms
. Personally, I strongly agree with the former statement. The three reasons are that public transport can cut traffic, lower air harm and help people who cannot buy a car, making it justifiable to spend more on it rather than constructing new
roads
Use synonyms
.
Body paragraph 1
To begin
Linking Words
 with, the use of mass transit systems can reduce the recurring issue of traffic congestion, since fewer private cars will be on the road as more families opt for transportation modes
such
Linking Words
 as buses.
For
Linking Words
this
Linking Words
 reason, individuals who travel daily can benefit from
this
Linking Words
, as it is less time-consuming for them to move from one place to another. To illustrate, in many Japanese cities
Linking Words
such
Punctuation problem
, such
show examples
 as Saitama, good train systems can reduce the need to drive, as the majority of the population uses the highly efficient public commuting network, which reduces their citizens' reliance on personal vehicles. The
roads
Use synonyms
 are nearly empty
while
Linking Words
 the trains are working in full swing.
Body paragraph 2
Additionally
Linking Words
, public transit services, particularly subways, are widely considered more environmentally friendly because the majority of them operate on electricity rather than petrol, effectively reducing greenhouse gas emissions, a major contributor to various health complications and global warming. Not only that, it moves people away from driving cars.
As a result
Linking Words
, burdens on the healthcare industry can be reduced as the incidence of pollution-related illnesses in a country declines.
Therefore
Linking Words
, investments in public transport are advantageous ,
although
Linking Words
 money must
also
Linking Words
 be spent on improving
roads
Use synonyms
 and creating new lines
,
Punctuation problem
;
show examples
more focus should be placed on the conveyance rather than
roads
Use synonyms
.
Body paragraph 3
Moreover
Linking Words
, mass commuting networks are the most accessible form of transportation.
For
Linking Words
this
Linking Words
 reason, they are highly advantageous for individuals from low-income households, students, and the elderly, since some may not be able to afford cars or may not own any.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I completely agree with the assertion that the government should prioritise investing in the enhancement of public transit systems to ensure optimal traffic flow, environmental sustainability, and inclusivity for all members of society.

Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site's author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Writing9 with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

task response
Your view is clear from the start, and you keep the same view to the end. To make the answer stronger, explain more clearly why public transport should get more money than new roads, not only why it is good.
task response
Your three main ideas are useful: less traffic, less air pollution, and help for people with less money. Add one more sentence to each idea to show how more public money would lead to these results.
task response
The Japan example is helpful, but it is a little too broad. Give a more exact and believable detail, or use a short general example, to show the link between good trains and fewer cars.
task response
You mention that some money should still go to roads. This is a good balanced point. Say when new roads are still needed, such as for places far from cities or for safety, so your view feels more complete.
coherence and cohesion
The essay has a clear order: introduction, three body parts, and conclusion. Keep this order, but make the third body part as full as the first two.
coherence and cohesion
Use clear links between ideas, but do not use the same ones too often. You use “For this reason” many times. Try simple changes such as “Also”, “Because of this”, and “This means that”.
coherence and cohesion
Some sentences are too long or join too many ideas. Split them into two short sentences so the meaning is easier to follow. For example, explain the health point in one sentence and the reason in the next.
coherence and cohesion
The sentence about trains working in full swing is not needed and does not add much support. Replace it with a sentence that directly explains how fewer cars make roads less busy.
task response
You answer the question directly and clearly state that public transport should get more money.
task response
Your main points are on topic and easy to understand: traffic, air pollution, and access for people who do not have a car.
coherence and cohesion
The introduction gives a clear plan, and the conclusion returns to the same main ideas.
coherence and cohesion
Each main idea has its own paragraph, which makes the essay easy to read.
What to do next:
Look at other essays: