Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · IELTS Momentum Workout · 2026-10-06

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

In many parts of the world girls and boys are educated together in co-educational or mixed schools. Some people think that girls and boys benefit from being educated separately in single-sex schools. To what extent do you agree with this view?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge and experience. Write at least 250 words.

Student answer (Band 6.0)

While in the world numerous institution works on co-educational systems, some people believe that it is more beneficial for students to get education in separate single-sex schools. I firmly disagree with the statement because it is not mandatory to separate genders from educational intituties. However it can increase students confidence and awares them about opposite genders.

First and foremost, co-education systems give exposure to students about different genders and their selective parts in ecosystem. Moreover, it helps different genders to communicate with each other, which eliminates the early stage hesitation or ignorance to develop. For instance, in European countries there is no gender inequality among all aspects of life; however, it helps the primary students to see opposite genders as normal human beings in co-educational schools.

Furthermore, co-educational schools helps to bridge the gap between genders to interact and be friends with opposite genders. The main key factor is that student from different genders find it much easier to study together which increases their hardship towards studies. Moreover, It helps to aware the students about personal boundaries of opposite genders and make daily interaction normal, results in more intellectual friends. For Instance, In Amarican schools students participates in different projects together with opposite genders which helps them to maximize their creativity. Consequently, this leads them to find emerging talents in opposite genders and focus more on studies.

In conclusion, education should not be considered on the bases of gender separation although it have multiple benefits on their growth. Co-education should be normalized on the whole planet as it aware the students about responsbilities and rights of opposite genders.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is clear from the introduction: you firmly disagree that students benefit more from single-sex education, and the conclusion restates your preference for co-education. You address the topic with relevant points about communication, reducing hesitation, understanding boundaries, and working together on projects. The examples about European and American schools help illustrate these ideas, although they are broad and not explained in much detail. Some claims are also unclear or insufficiently developed, such as the suggestion that studying together “increases their hardship towards studies”; the intended benefit is difficult to identify. To strengthen the response, explain how each point supports your position and develop one or two examples more specifically, while acknowledging the benefits of single-sex education before explaining why you disagree overall.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The essay has a clear overall structure, with an introduction, two body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Its main progression—from exposure and communication to friendship and collaboration—is generally easy to follow. You use linking expressions such as “First and foremost,” “Furthermore,” and “Consequently,” and these help signal the stages of your argument. However, some connections feel mechanical, and several sentences combine ideas without making their relationship clear. For example, the sentence beginning “The main key factor” moves from studying together to increased “hardship,” leaving the logic uncertain. References such as “it” in “it helps to aware the students” are also not always clear. For a stronger progression, make each paragraph’s central point explicit and use transitions that show the precise relationship between claims and examples.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You attempt a range of topic-related vocabulary, including “co-educational systems,” “gender inequality,” “personal boundaries,” and “emerging talents.” These choices show an effort to discuss the issue beyond basic terms. However, inaccurate word choice, collocation, word forms, and spelling are noticeable and sometimes make ideas unclear. For instance, “selective parts in ecosystem” does not clearly express the intended idea, while “increases their hardship towards studies” appears to use “hardship” in the wrong sense. There are also forms such as “intituties,” “Amarican,” and “responsbilities.” Aim for precise, natural combinations such as “roles in society,” “improves their engagement with their studies,” and “responsibilities.” Proofreading spelling and checking unfamiliar phrases in context would make your vocabulary more effective.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You use both simple statements and attempts at complex sentences, including clauses introduced by “because,” “which,” and “although.” This gives the essay some structural variety, and the main argument is generally understandable. However, errors in agreement, verb forms, articles, and sentence construction occur across the response. For example, “numerous institution works” needs plural agreement, and “co-educational schools helps” should also have a plural verb. In “students participates,” the subject and verb do not agree; “although it have multiple benefits” has a similar problem. Some sentence patterns are incomplete or awkwardly joined, as in “Moreover, It helps to aware the students.” Practise checking subject–verb agreement and building complete clauses, then review punctuation and capitalisation after sentence boundaries.

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.