Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · IELTS Academic Practice Accelerator · 2026-11-07

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 6.0)

Animals should not be kept in zoos, and zoos must be closed. I strongly agree with this statement, because animals are not for entertainment purposes. Secondly, if humans have free will to live their own lives, then animals should be able to roam their natural habitats freely in jungles and forests.

The first reason, that animals are kept in the zoo is because of entertainment purposes. People really do not care about the health and feelings of the animals. Animals are living creatures too; they can feel pain and loneliness. For instance, sometimes if the zoos do not have a female or male partner for any animal they still keep that animal in the zoo, because people are paying them to see those animals. Furthermore, people all around the world believe that animals are for public amusement, and they go to zoos for their pleasures.

Humans can live freely in their homes or any part of the world. They do not have any restrictions in their lives. However, compared to the life of an animal, they can not live such life. For instance, dolphins and whales are the most favorite animals of people because they are so friendly and joyful. So many parks keep them in small water pools for people's enjoyement. Moreover, whales want more water to swim in, but zoo keepers keep them in small pools without caring about their needs.

In conclusion, I strongly believe that zoos should be closed from each part of the world. Because animals are living creatures too, and they want to live their lives freely in their habitats with their families, and they are not for the amusement of the public.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is clear from the opening—“I strongly agree”—and remains consistent in the conclusion. You give relevant reasons about animals’ welfare and freedom, supported by examples involving animals kept without partners and whales confined in small pools. This addresses the task, but some points are asserted more than explained. For example, the claim that people “do not care about the health and feelings” of animals is broad, and the first example would be stronger if you explained how captivity harms the animal or why this supports closing zoos rather than improving their standards. You also do not consider any possible conservation or educational role of zoos. Developing the reasoning and acknowledging this counterargument would make the response more complete and persuasive.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a clear overall arrangement: an introduction states your view, two body paragraphs present reasons, and a conclusion restates your position. Sequencing phrases such as “The first reason,” “Furthermore,” and “In conclusion” help readers follow the argument. However, some linking is mechanical, and the relationship between ideas is not always precise. “Secondly” appears in the introduction before the reasons are fully established, while “However” introduces a comparison that is not clearly contrasted. The paragraph about human freedom also shifts quickly to dolphins and whales without a clear topic sentence connecting the example to the main claim. Use fewer formulaic transitions and make each paragraph’s central point explicit, then connect examples directly to that point.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use enough vocabulary to communicate your argument, including relevant terms such as “natural habitats,” “loneliness,” “restrictions,” and “amusement.” There are also attempts at more specific language, particularly in the examples about dolphins, whales, and their living conditions. However, several phrases are repetitive or imprecise: “entertainment purposes,” “for their pleasures,” and “for people’s enjoyement” express similar ideas, and “small water pools” is not a natural collocation. Spelling errors such as “enjoyement” and “favorite” also reduce accuracy. Aim for more precise vocabulary about animal welfare and captivity, and check spelling and collocations carefully. This would make the argument sound more natural and less repetitive.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, including conditional structures such as “if humans have free will … then animals should be able to roam” and a contrast introduced by “However.” Most sentences remain understandable, but some grammatical errors and punctuation problems are present. For example, “the life of an animal, they can not live such life” has an unclear pronoun reference and awkward comparison, while “Because animals are living creatures too” is a sentence fragment after the conclusion’s full stop. There are also inconsistent spaces around punctuation and unnecessary commas, as in “The first reason, that animals…”. Review sentence boundaries, pronoun references, and comma use, while continuing to practise complex structures.

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.