Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · IELTS General Essentials · 2026-10-03

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

We no longer need to have animals kept in zoos, so zoos should be closed.

Do you agree or disagree?

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

Student answer (Band 5.5)

Animals play a crucial role in food chain cycle. It has become a highly debatable issue that there is no need to have zoos to keep the animals in, while some people oppose this notion. This essay will discuss my opinion how zoos are beneficial for animals and wild life as there must be some loses as well.

Firstly, It helps to save the endangered species. To elaborate this, there are a number of animals which are almost gone and have a few numbers left with like white peacock and lion. For such kind of animals, zoos are the best place to keep them alive with extra care and supervision. For example, zoo at Pune got its name in the Guinness book to preserve the white peacocks and having their next generation with a lot of efforts.

Furthermore, zoos can be used as a safety guard for small animals. Wild life is very dangerous where big animals easily make small animals their food. Some animals rely on other animals' flesh and flood so they attack on them which lead those species to their end. by keeping those animals in zoos, they can be protected and be saved for the next generations.

On the other hand, animal preservation centers can take the freedom of those animals because every kind has their different area to live and walk around as per the safety concerns. They cannot walk freely anywhere as they are supposed to be in the forest.

To conclude, although zoos are helping different animals to keep alive, yet it is restricted for their safety.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

The response addresses the prompt by discussing whether zoos should be closed, presenting a position that leans towards their benefits for conservation despite some drawbacks regarding animal freedom. However, the development of ideas is somewhat limited and uneven across the paragraphs. For instance, the main body paragraphs offer relevant points about endangered species and protection from predators, but these ideas remain underdeveloped without sufficient depth or broader contextual analysis. The conclusion introduces a somewhat unclear and contradictory thought regarding the restriction of animals for their safety, which prevents the position from being fully clear and consistently supported throughout. To move to a higher level, the writer needs to extend and support all arguments more thoroughly with detailed elaboration and maintain a clear, consistent stance from introduction to conclusion.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The essay displays a coherent overall arrangement with a discernible progression of ideas from introduction to conclusion. Paragraphing is utilised appropriately to separate distinct points, such as endangered species and protection from predators. However, the management of cohesive devices is sometimes mechanical or faulty. For instance, transitional phrases like 'To elaborate this' and referencing words like 'For such kind of animals' feel slightly awkward and repetitive. Additionally, referencing is occasionally unclear, such as in the concluding paragraph where the connection between animals being kept alive and being restricted lacks smooth logical linking. Achieving a higher band would require more flexible and natural use of cohesive devices, alongside clearer referencing to ensure seamless progression throughout the text.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

The vocabulary used is adequate for the task, demonstrating sufficient range to communicate basic ideas about wildlife and conservation. The writer attempts some less common vocabulary, such as 'endangered species', 'preservation', and 'supervision', but these attempts are occasionally marred by inaccuracies in word choice and collocation, such as 'food chain cycle' instead of 'the food chain' and 'have a few numbers left with'. There are also minor awkward phrasings like 'flood' instead of 'blood' or 'food'. These errors do not seriously impede communication, but they restrict the precision and flexibility of the writing. To reach the next band, the writer must incorporate a wider range of sophisticated vocabulary and idiomatic expressions with greater accuracy and natural collocation.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The text demonstrates a limited range of sentence structures, relying heavily on simple forms alongside a few attempts at complex sentences which are frequently faulty. There are noticeable errors in grammar, articles, and prepositions that recur throughout the response, such as 'discuss my opinion how', 'zoo at Pune got its name in the Guinness book', 'attack on them which lead', and missing plural or singular agreement markers like 'every kind has their different area'. Punctuation and article usage also show frequent lapses, such as omitting necessary articles before nouns. These errors demand some effort from the reader to decode the intended meaning. To improve, the writer needs to increase control over complex sentence patterns and significantly reduce the frequency of basic grammatical slips.

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.