Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · 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 5.5)

The most importand aim of science should be to improve the lives of individuals the role of science should be benefical for people's lives .

According to my perspective the goal of science should to make our lives easy and good technology recently also launching machines for hospitals. Science is also playing role in our academic life such as AI and other online websites are invented by science.and futher science should only focus on human benefits only science can make human life easy and comfortable if science and technology was not focusing on improving lives so now there was no electricity people were not able to see eachother in dark this is beacuse due to science .Due to the fact science should improve more for benefits of people's because some of the areas are similar to past nothing development is accourd science should foocus on them to improve there lifestyle.

Science is aiming only to improve lives of people who belong to cities while in countryside there are less developments of science due to which people's are facing difficulties .For example people are facing problems in hospital instruments because they are only launched for cities a female who is pregnant and at the time of delivery her baby expired due to the lack of developments and facilites .

In conclusion , sciene should more aim to improve people's lives should invent enough instruments related to hospital ,schools ,universites that not a single person left behind and not take the advantage of science

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You take a generally clear position that science should improve people’s lives, and you give relevant areas such as hospitals, education, electricity, and unequal access between cities and the countryside. The example of a pregnant woman facing inadequate medical facilities helps illustrate the consequences of limited development. However, the response addresses the question only partially: it mostly repeats the central claim rather than explaining how improving lives should rank against other possible aims of science. Several points are asserted but not developed, such as the claim that science should focus only on human benefits. To strengthen the response, explain your reasoning in more depth and connect each example directly to the extent of your agreement.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

There is some organisation: the response begins with a position, gives examples related to technology and healthcare, and ends with a conclusion. The shift to unequal development in rural areas also introduces a relevant new aspect. However, progression is difficult to follow because several different ideas are crowded into one long paragraph, and the opening repeats the same point. Linking phrases such as “According to my perspective” and “Due to the fact” do not always clarify the relationship between ideas. The conclusion largely restates the argument rather than drawing the points together. Use separate paragraphs for your position, supporting reasons, and conclusion, and make each paragraph develop one main idea with clear links between sentences.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

Your vocabulary is sufficient to communicate the main topic, with relevant terms such as “technology,” “hospitals,” “electricity,” and “countryside.” You also attempt more specific expressions, including “hospital instruments” and “lack of developments,” but these are not natural or precise in context. Repetition of “improve,” “lives,” and “science” limits the range, while spelling errors such as “importand,” “benefical,” and “sciene” are noticeable and sometimes make reading harder. Aim to use accurate topic-specific collocations and check spelling carefully. For example, describe medical equipment as “medical equipment” and refer to “limited healthcare facilities” rather than using broad or awkward phrases.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response attempts both simple statements and longer sentences, but the range is limited and complex sentences are often difficult to control. Errors in sentence structure and verb forms appear in examples such as “the goal of science should to make our lives” and “if science and technology was not focusing … so now there was no electricity.” Agreement and article use also need attention, as in “people’s are facing difficulties.” Punctuation is inconsistent, with several sentences joined together without clear boundaries, which makes the argument harder to understand. Practise building accurate sentences with “should” plus a base verb, and divide long ideas into shorter sentences. More reliable control of these patterns would make your meaning clearer.

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.