Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-11-07

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

The most important aim of science should be to improve people’s lives. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Give reasons for your answers and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

 

Student answer (Band 5.5)

Science and technology are constantly improving our lives and society. I believe the main objective of sciecne should be improving the lives of people.

From the ancient age, people are discovering and inventing new things with the goal of improving the livelihood. If this was not the case, we would not be where we are today. In the early stages of mankind, human used to live in caves and ate raw meats. Gradually, they invented woods and learned how to make homes with the woods, how to cook meat with fire. The hope of having a better life drove them to inventing tools, objects, and strategies. Still today, this same goal drives us to do research and discover things; the goal of serving the mankind. I belive if we invent something that is really amazing but is of no use to us, it's useless. Every invented object must have a valid usage, otherwise who would invest on it? Why it's even needs to be made? No one would be interest in that invention. People would only be interested if it makes their live better.

Unfortunately, science can be used to harm people too. For example, in 1956, a new virus was invented by a specific country as biological weapon. It affected around half a million people worldwide. Though it was not for the betterment of poeple, it was still used by a country. So even a invention is harmful, a group of people might still be interested on that, but it is not a good use of science. Science should not be used like this.

So, in my conclusion, I would say making people's lives better should be the primary concern when scientist are working to discover or invent something. Man should work for the betterment of mankind.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

Your position is clear: you agree that improving people’s lives should be science’s main aim, and you maintain this view in the conclusion. The historical examples of shelter, cooking and tools are relevant, while the paragraph about harmful uses shows some awareness that science can serve other purposes. However, the discussion is not fully developed. The historical account is broad and does not explain in detail how it supports the claim about science today. The biological-weapon example is also unclear and appears to contain a factual problem: it says a virus was “invented” in 1956 and affected people worldwide, without identifying or substantiating the event. Develop fewer examples more precisely, and explain how they support your position. A brief acknowledgement of other legitimate aims, such as understanding the natural world, would also make the response more balanced.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a coherent overall arrangement: it introduces your position, gives supporting reasoning and an example, considers harmful applications, and concludes. Paragraph breaks help distinguish these stages, and phrases such as “For example” and “So” signal relationships between ideas. At times, however, progression within paragraphs is less controlled. The first body paragraph moves from early human history to modern research and then to rhetorical questions about usefulness, without clearly separating or developing these points. The repeated references to “the goal” and “better life” also make the argument feel circular. Use clearer topic sentences and connect each example explicitly to the claim it supports; vary linking language and avoid relying on rhetorical questions to advance the reasoning.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use enough vocabulary to communicate the central argument, including topic-related terms such as “research,” “biological weapon,” “invent,” and “betterment.” There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, for example “primary concern” and “serving the mankind.” However, word choice and collocation are often inaccurate or repetitive, which limits precision. “Invented woods” does not express the intended idea, and “valid usage” and “invest on it” are unnatural in context. Several spellings are also incorrect, including “sciecne,” “belive,” and “poeple.” Build a more accurate range of topic vocabulary and check common word partnerships and spelling. For instance, distinguish between discovering a phenomenon and inventing a tool, and use natural expressions such as “invest in research” or “improve people’s quality of life.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt both simple and more complex sentence forms, including conditional structures such as “If this was not the case, we would not be where we are today” and a concessive opening with “Though.” The main ideas remain understandable, but grammatical control is uneven, particularly in longer sentences. Examples include “human used to live,” where the subject and verb do not agree, and “Why it’s even needs to be made?”, which has an incorrect question structure. There are also problems with articles and number, as in “a invention,” and with verb forms in “the goal of serving the mankind.” Work on agreement, question formation, articles and plural forms, then proofread each sentence for a complete and correctly punctuated structure. More accurate complex sentences 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.