Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-11-12

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 6.0)

Science has made lives easier. Scientific research should be aimed to improve human lives without affecting natural ecosystem. I firmly agree with the statement that science should be used to make human lives more easy and convenient, but its negative impacts on atmosphere and other species should be avoided.

Initially, it is evident that science has improved lifestyle of people all over the world. For instance in field of medicine, advanced healthcare facilities, such as modern medicine, surgical techniques, and various other therapies have rose the life expentency these days, compared with past. Vaccination techniques are being used to prevent outbreaks of different contagious diseases. Moreover in the field of mechanics, numerous machines have been manufactured to facilitate humans in their daily routines. For example, automatic washing machine, dishwasher, and blender have made cooking easier for housewives, as well as for professionals.

Furthermore, cars, buses, planes, and trains etc., have reduced distances. People cover distance of hours in minutes, and of minutes in seconds.

By contrast, there are some adverse effects of science, on humans and overall biodiversity, has been endured over last few years, such as global warming, wars, and abuse of natural resources. Due to global warming, earth's temperature is increasing gradually melting glaciers and raising sea levels, because of carbon emission by industries raises concerns.

As far as I am concerned, I strongly agree that scientific researches should be promoted, as they facilitate humans. But negative affects of science must be taken serious and avoided. Interference of humans with nature through science should be prohibited.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

Your position is clear from the introduction: you agree that science should improve people’s lives, while arguing that harm to nature should be avoided. You support this with relevant examples from medicine, household technology, transport, and environmental damage, so the response addresses the main question. The discussion of benefits is more fully illustrated than the environmental qualification, which is introduced mainly through a list of “global warming, wars, and abuse of natural resources.” The final claim that human interference with nature “should be prohibited” is also stronger than the reasoning provided. To develop the response further, explain how scientific progress can improve lives while limiting these harms, and extend one or two examples with clearer cause-and-effect reasoning.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, a paragraph on benefits, a contrast paragraph on harms, and a conclusion. Sequencing expressions such as “Initially,” “Furthermore,” and “By contrast” help signal the direction of the argument. However, some links feel mechanical, and the transport point is separated into a short paragraph rather than being integrated with the other examples of scientific benefits. The sentence beginning “By contrast” also has an unclear relationship between its subject and verb, which interrupts the flow. In addition, “these days, compared with past” does not clearly specify the comparison. Group related examples into fuller paragraphs and use clearer references and transitions to show how each point supports your position.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of topic vocabulary, including “surgical techniques,” “contagious diseases,” “biodiversity,” “glaciers,” and “carbon emission.” These terms help make the examples relevant and specific. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “adverse effects” and “scientific researches,” though some choices or combinations are inaccurate or unnatural. For example, “rose the life expentency” and “negative affects” contain spelling or word-form problems, while “people cover distance of hours in minutes” is not an idiomatic way to express faster travel. “Mechanics” is also not the natural term for the field being discussed. Aim for precise collocations and check spelling and word forms; this will make your meaning more fluent without requiring more complicated vocabulary.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt both simple and complex sentence forms, including a contrast clause in “but its negative impacts … should be avoided” and a cause-and-effect explanation of global warming. Meaning is generally understandable, but some grammatical errors remain. For example, “research should be aimed to improve” has an incorrect verb pattern, and “there are some adverse effects … has been endured” combines incompatible sentence structures. The clause “because of carbon emission by industries raises concerns” also lacks a clear grammatical relationship between its parts. Articles and plurals are sometimes inaccurate, as in “in field of medicine” and “automatic washing machine.” Review verb patterns, subject–verb agreement, and article use, then proofread complex sentences to ensure each clause is complete and correctly connected.

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.