Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-11-10

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)

the question is that the most important aim of science should be to improve people lives.i agree with this statement but there are some solid reason also that disagree with this statement.but i think the reason which are more logicals are which agrees with this statement.

the reason which people gives when they disagree with this statement are that which are like fairy tale lover they like science fiction movies these kind of people believe that science should focus on how human life begin on mars or moon for them instead of improving health care or finding the sollution for cancer is not that much important than finding a clue of life in mars.

reason number one is that science means the correct wat to do somthing so i think the main motive of scintefic solution should be around human life maybe around other thing but the main aim should be around easing human live because by easing human life and helping other being like us will also influence any scientist life dirtectly.

if a sciencetist working on improving human health care system instead of working on a research project on a planet which is far far away from us.logically and rationallt thinking working on human health will be more fruitful than any other thing.

one of my close friend how is a science fiction lover how always love to watch

science fiction movies and read novels is suffering from cancer which is unfortunatly uncurable as of now we discuss this topic and he atlast agree with me instead of finding earth creation time or life exist in a planet which is million of miles away from us the aim of science should be improving human life

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

Your position is clear: you agree that science should primarily improve people’s lives, and you acknowledge an opposing view about exploring life beyond Earth. The health-care and cancer examples are relevant, and the personal anecdote gives your argument a concrete focus. However, the response addresses the issue only partially because the opposing position is presented as a caricature of science-fiction fans, rather than explored as a serious argument about the value of discovery. Your main reasons also remain under-developed: explain more precisely how research into health or everyday needs benefits society, and recognise that basic research can sometimes lead to practical improvements. A more balanced discussion and fuller explanation of each reason would make the response more convincing.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.5

There is a recognisable overall structure: an introduction, a paragraph presenting a counterargument, and paragraphs supporting your view. The repeated focus on human health helps the reader follow your central position. However, progression is limited because the ideas are not clearly separated or developed into a sequence of distinct supporting points. The second paragraph’s description of people who disagree leads into a long, difficult-to-follow sentence, and the final anecdote repeats the earlier cancer example rather than adding a new stage to the argument. Linking phrases such as “reason number one” are mechanical, while references such as “these kind of people” are not always precise. Use clearer topic sentences, develop one reason per paragraph, and connect each example explicitly to the claim it supports.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some vocabulary relevant to the topic, including “health care,” “cancer,” “research project,” and “human life,” so your main meaning is generally understandable. However, the range is limited and several expressions are inaccurate or awkward, which sometimes makes the reader work to interpret your point. Examples include “solid reason,” “the correct wat to do somthing,” and “finding a clue of life in mars.” There are also frequent spelling and word-form problems, such as “sollution,” “scintefic,” and “rationallt,” which reduce clarity and control. Aim for more precise academic collocations and check spelling carefully. Replacing repeated general phrases such as “improving human life” with specific terms for health, safety, or quality of life would also broaden your expression.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt some longer sentences and subordinate clauses, for example when contrasting health research with research on a distant planet. However, the range is limited, and complex sentences are often difficult to control. Errors in sentence boundaries and punctuation are especially noticeable: “if a sciencetist working … from us.logically” joins incomplete or disconnected clauses, while the opening paragraph uses several sentences without appropriate capitalisation or punctuation. There are also problems with agreement and sentence structure, as in “the reason which people gives” and “one of my close friend how … is suffering.” These errors sometimes make relationships between ideas unclear. Practise building accurate simple sentences first, then add clauses using clear conjunctions and consistent punctuation.

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.