Band 7.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 7.5 · IELTS Academic Practice Accelerator · 2026-09-20

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

Smoking can cause serious illnesses and should be made illegal.

To what extent do you agree?

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

Student answer (Band 7.5)

The proposition that smoking, due to its unequivocal link to fatal diseases, should be prohibited entirely is a contentious one. While I acknowledge the severe health hazards it poses, I maintain that an outright ban is an overreaching measure that fails to account for individual autonomy and the practical complexities of enforcement. This essay will argue for a nuanced approach, combining stringent regulation with harm reduction, rather than draconian prohibition.

Undeniably, the health burden of smoking is catastrophic. Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and cardiovascular ailments, claiming over eight million lives annually worldwide. For example, in countries with high smoking prevalence, healthcare systems are strained by the treatment of smoking-related illnesses, and the economic cost of lost productivity is astronomical. From a public health perspective, the argument for prohibition is logically compelling—if a product universally harms users and those exposed to second-hand smoke, a ban would ostensibly eliminate this suffering. However, such a viewpoint simplifies the issue by ignoring historical evidence. The American experiment with alcohol prohibition in the 1920s demonstrated that outright bans do not eradicate consumption; they merely drive it underground, creating black markets and increasing criminality, while failing to protect the most vulnerable.

Furthermore, a blanket ban would infringe upon the principle of personal liberty. In liberal democratic societies, adults possess the right to engage in risky behaviours, provided they do not harm others. Smoking, when confined to private spaces or designated areas, does not violate this condition. Many smokers are fully cognisant of the risks, yet they choose to smoke due to addiction or enjoyment—a choice that, although seemingly irrational, is within their purview. Instead of prohibition, governments can more effectively mitigate harm through a multifaceted strategy. For instance, Australia's plain packaging laws, combined with high excise taxes and extensive anti-smoking campaigns, have reduced smoking rates without outlawing the product. Additionally, promoting alternatives like nicotine patches or e-cigarettes, which are up to 95% less harmful, offers a pragmatic path to reduce mortality. Such measures respect autonomy while achieving public health goals, making prohibition both unnecessary and counterproductive.

In conclusion, while smoking undeniably causes serious illnesses, making it illegal is an excessive and ineffective solution. The ethical and practical flaws of a ban outweigh its purported benefits. I firmly disagree with outright prohibition, advocating instead for a rigorous regulatory regime that balances public health with individual freedom, thereby achieving a more pragmatic and humane outcome.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 7.5

The response fully addresses all parts of the task by presenting a well-developed position on whether smoking should be made illegal. The introduction clearly states the writer's stance against an outright ban, and this position is maintained throughout the essay. Main ideas are extended and supported with relevant examples, such as the historical reference to American alcohol prohibition and contemporary policies like Australia's plain packaging laws. The arguments are balanced, weighing public health burdens against personal liberty and practical enforcement challenges. The response meets all the requirements for a Band 8 level in Task Achievement.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 7.5

Ideas are logically sequenced, and there is a clear progression throughout the essay. Paragraphing is used sufficiently and appropriately, with each paragraph focusing on a distinct central theme, such as the health burden, historical lessons, and personal liberty. Cohesive devices are managed well, using appropriate transitional phrases like 'Undeniably,' 'Furthermore,' and 'In conclusion' to guide the reader smoothly from one idea to another. Referencing and substitution are clear and effective, resulting in an essay that is cohesive without being overly mechanical. This performance comfortably aligns with Band 8 descriptors.

Lexical Resource — Band 7.5

The student demonstrates a wide, fluent, and flexible lexical resource that enables precise expression of complex ideas. Less common items such as 'unequivocal link', 'overreaching measure', 'draconian prohibition', and 'pragmatic path' are used skilfully and naturally. There is a strong awareness of collocation and academic style throughout the response. Only occasional minor inaccuracies can be found, but these do not impede communication in any way. The vocabulary choice clearly elevates the overall quality of the writing, earning a high band score.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 7.5

The essay displays a wide range of complex structures used with a high degree of control and flexibility. Sentences such as conditional clauses, participial phrases, and relative clauses are employed naturally. The majority of sentences are entirely error-free, and punctuation is handled with precision. While there may be very occasional minor slips, these do not detract from the fluency of the writing. The grammatical control demonstrated here easily satisfies the criteria for Band 8.

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.