Sample response & feedback

Raising the Minimum Legal Driving Age for Road Safety

Question

Some people think that the best way to increase road safety is to increase the minimum legal age for driving cars and riding motorbikes. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Annotated response

17 correction notes

Showing 17 correction notes.

Due to the rapidly increasing number of vehicles on the road, chances of are greater for . I completely disagree with the statement that the best way to is to for the above-mentioned vehicles. This articulation will elucidate the justification of my standpoint in the subsequent paragraphs.

First and foremost, in this modern era youngsters are new bikes or luxurious cars. Thus, if legal age is escalated, being impulsive, they would not wait for a long period of time, and they will drive in an illegal way, and they will become a real threat for the walkers and also for themselves. For instance, minors who drive recklessly on the road and even without having a license drive and in their ignorance regarding rules of driving on the road, damage public property as well as harm the pedestrian. Thus, the rising legal age is not a wise decision as it will be responsible for making traffic congestion and accident on the road.

In addition, for driving or riding motorbikes is not the best decision. Instead, increasing the training period, which is inadequate to learn driving, should be enhanced. So that people can learn well and would obey the rules. Besides, any disobedience on the part of drivers in the initial six months will make them the rules and wear safety gear while driving. Thus, it will be more fruitful for increasing road safety to save humankind.

In conclusion, Human life is precious, and to protect human beings, road safety is essential but not on the cost of enhancing legal age for driving and motorbikes as it will make way for the people to drive illegally as well as other measures must be adopted namely rising training period and too name but a few.

Overall assessment

Why this response received Band 6.0

The response presents a clear, consistent disagreement with the proposal and offers relevant supporting arguments about illegal driving and better training. Its main limitations are repetitive idea development and persistent grammatical and word-choice errors, such as 'found of' and 'on the cost of', that reduce precision throughout.

IELTS criteria

How each score was decided

TR Task Response

6.0

The position is clear and relevant main ideas about illegal driving and improved training are presented, but ideas are repetitive and development is uneven rather than fully extended.

CC Coherence and Cohesion

6.0

Progression is broadly clear with basic paragraph organisation, yet repeated “Thus” endings make cohesion mechanical, and references such as “it” in the training paragraph are unclear.

LR Lexical Resource

6.0

The response shows attempts at less common vocabulary such as 'elucidate' and 'abide by', but awkward or inaccurate usage like 'found of', 'escalate road safety', and 'on the cost of' limits precision.

GRA Grammatical Range and Accuracy

6.0

A mix of simple and complex structures is attempted, but inconsistent modal forms, a dependent-clause fragment and overloaded sentence construction reduce accuracy and sometimes obscure meaning.