Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Barron's Writing · 2026-10-21

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

People should never eat meat because raising animals for human consumption is cruel.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

Give reasons for your answer, and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Student answer (Band 5.5)

In recent years, there has been an ongoing debate about harming animals for their meat consumption by humans is a cruality.

I strongly agree with the view as animals also have their specific role on the Earth, I believe, humans should never have to consume animal's meat to maintaing the balance of the ecological system.

One of the prominant reasons behind this view is that animals have their own roles in maintaing the environment, and killing some innocent species is also a crime and cruality. This is because the animals are not only for the meat purpose, they have thier own roles in the environment. For example, many animals work to maintain a chin of the ecological cycle. If humans consumes and kills them for their food, they will disturbed this cycle, which can contribute to imbalance of the environments.

Additionally, humans are superior to every species on the Earth that does not mean they have all rights to do anything with the other innocent species who cannot speak for their own survival. As humans are the one who nurture some animals and they use it for their diet. this is the most unkind nature of humans because they are not only harming the animals, but they also disturbing the nature. For instance, humans have many vegetarian food option that they can consum. As a result, many people who eat meat suffer from various diseases that cannot be controlled by existed medicine.

In conclusion, I strongly believe that raising animals for the sack of our own benefits is a crime and crualty.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is clear from the introduction—“I strongly agree”—and remains consistent in the conclusion. You give relevant reasons about animals’ ecological roles and their inability to defend themselves, and you include an example of vegetarian alternatives. However, the response addresses the cruelty argument less fully than the environmental argument: ecological imbalance is not directly explained as evidence that raising animals is cruel. The claim that meat-eaters suffer from diseases is also introduced without support and does not clearly strengthen your position. Develop each main reason with a specific explanation or example, and connect it explicitly to animal welfare and the question of whether animals should ever be raised for food. This would make the argument more complete and convincing.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, two body paragraphs signalled by “One of the prominent reasons” and “Additionally,” and a conclusion. The ideas generally progress from environmental effects to human responsibility, so the overall arrangement is coherent. However, some links between claims are unclear: the discussion of ecological balance shifts to the claim that killing animals is a crime, while the final point about diseases appears abruptly and is not connected to the preceding argument. Repetition of “animals,” “humans,” and “environment” also makes the progression feel less smooth. Use clearer referencing and ensure each example directly develops the paragraph’s main point; transitions should show the relationship between ideas rather than simply add another claim.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You attempt topic-related vocabulary such as “ecological system,” “species,” “survival,” and “vegetarian,” which helps communicate the subject. However, the range is limited and several noticeable spelling and word-choice errors reduce precision, including “cruality,” “prominant,” “maintaining,” “thier,” and “sack” where “sake” is intended. Some combinations are also unnatural, such as “meat purpose,” “chain of the ecological cycle,” and “vegetarian food option.” These errors do not prevent the reader from understanding your main position, but they make parts of the argument less clear and polished. Build accuracy with common collocations for animal welfare and food production, and check spelling and word forms carefully before submitting.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You use both simple statements and attempts at longer structures, including a conditional sentence beginning “If humans consumes and kills them” and a clause introduced by “As humans…”. This shows some range, but errors in agreement, verb forms, articles, and sentence boundaries occur across the response. For example, “If humans consumes” should use a plural verb, and “they will disturbed” needs a correctly formed verb after “will.” The opening sentence is also difficult to follow because its clause structure is incomplete, while “As humans are the one…” is not a complete independent sentence. Practise building accurate complex sentences with clear subjects and verbs, and check agreement and punctuation. Greater control would make your reasoning easier to follow.

See this exact question answered at other band scores. The same prompt compared across bands.

Browse more IELTS Writing model answers or get your own writing scored by the same AI examiner.