Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-11-09

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 5.0)

It is argued whether science should only be aimed be to improve people's lives. I strongly disagree with this point of view because studying different fields benefits human beings directly and indirectly. Also it helps to discover treatments for many disorders and diseaseTo begin with, learning about numerous specialties of science helps people understand the different aspects of the earth.Without acknowleging those aspects, the importance of studying human beings would only be of little relevance, since individuals are affected by many external things unrelated to the human body. For instance, astronomy has benefited mankind because without it, would not have been able to explore planets, learn about the earth and how it rotates around the sun. On the other hand, studying all sub-specialties of science provide a whole unit for scientists to use. The discoveries of remedies and drugs extracted from insects or animals can be used to treat fatal diseases or tumors. Research in meteorolgy enabled people to live freely without giving the weather much of importance, since they have developed weather apps to inform them about the upcoming weather. For instance, many people look up the weather before booking certain trips, to make sure they can enjoy them. In conclusion, I believe that learning about all types of science affects both the individual, since scientists discover different types of treatment yearly. It also benefits the environment we live in, to be aware of our surroundings and how they affect us.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

You take a clear position by saying, “I strongly disagree,” and give relevant reasons: science can expand understanding of the Earth and space, and research can produce treatments and useful weather information. However, the response only partially develops the question. The prompt asks whether improving people’s lives should be science’s most important aim, but your opening reframes this as whether science should “only” aim to improve lives. This leaves the central comparison of priorities unclear. Some examples, such as astronomy and weather apps, are mentioned but not fully connected to why scientific aims should be broader than human welfare. The response is also 8 words below the required minimum. Develop the distinction between improving lives and other valuable aims, and explain each example more fully.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0

There is some organisation: the response opens with a position, develops examples, and ends with a conclusion. Linking phrases such as “To begin with,” “For instance,” and “On the other hand” help signal relationships between points. However, the overall progression is difficult to follow because several ideas are crowded into one long paragraph, with no clear separation between the discussion of astronomy, medical research, and meteorology. The contrast signalled by “On the other hand” is not clearly established, and the conclusion largely repeats earlier claims rather than drawing them together. Some sentences also run directly into one another, making the structure harder to read. Use distinct paragraphs for each main reason and make the links between examples and your position explicit.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use some topic-relevant vocabulary, including “specialties of science,” “astronomy,” “treatments,” “meteorology,” and “fatal diseases.” This gives you enough language to communicate the main subject and examples. However, the range is limited and several choices or combinations are inaccurate or awkward, such as “aimed be to,” “a whole unit,” and “giving the weather much of importance.” There are also spelling errors in “acknowleging,” “disease,” and “meteorolgy,” which reduce accuracy. Some wording is repetitive, particularly the repeated references to “science” and “people.” Build a more precise range for discussing scientific purposes and outcomes, and check spelling and collocations carefully so that your ideas are expressed naturally.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and complex sentences, including a reason clause with “since” and a conditional structure beginning “Without acknowledging those aspects.” However, the range is limited, and complex sentences are often faulty. For example, “It is argued whether science should only be aimed be to improve” contains an incorrect verb construction, while “without it, would not have been able to explore” lacks a clear subject. There are also agreement and sentence-boundary problems, as in “studying all sub-specialties of science provide,” and the opening runs into the next sentence without appropriate punctuation. These errors sometimes make the reader pause to interpret your meaning. Practise accurate verb patterns, subject–verb agreement, and sentence boundaries, then proofread each sentence for a complete subject and verb.

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.