Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-11-13

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)

Individual's life should be the primary target of science. I agree with this proposal because focusing on making individual's life better with the help of science has advantages like Healthcare, Disease Eradication and in Solving Urgent Global Crises.

On the one hand it helps to create a good healthcare system which further helps in removing illness. In addition, humans are capable of doing everything in this era but, still there are some disease which are life threatning. To solve this scientific reasearch can be carried out to develop solutions for these diseases. For instance, developing vaccines and antibiotics for diseases like Cancer and diabetes which can increase the life expectancy and improves daily quality of life. Therefore, science can help to imporve healthcare system which could decrease the life threatning diseases for people.

Whereas on the other hand it helps to Solve urgent global crises. Furthermore, In todays era there are many problems which are considered to be solved rapidly like food, water and energy. Without these elements human cannot survive. Millions of people still lack this basic requirements science should prioritise inventions to solve the problem. For example, for food drought resistant crops, desalination plants for water and renewable enery plant for generating energy

In conclusion, although science have many areas for reasarch and development its primary focus should be on improving human life because of advantages like healthcare and disease eradication and solving urgent global crises.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is clear from the opening: you agree that improving people’s lives should be science’s primary aim. Both body paragraphs give relevant reasons, covering healthcare and urgent needs such as food, water and energy, with examples including vaccines, drought-resistant crops and desalination plants. This addresses the task, but the ideas are not developed equally or in enough detail. The healthcare paragraph links research to longer life and quality of life, while the global-crises paragraph mainly lists solutions without explaining how they would improve people’s lives or why these should be priorities. The conclusion restates your view but adds little. The response is also 12 words below the required minimum. Develop each example with a clearer explanation and add a little more relevant support.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, two body paragraphs presenting separate reasons, and a conclusion. The progression from healthcare to global crises is logical, and signposting such as “For instance” and “In conclusion” helps readers follow the argument. However, some linking is mechanical or awkward. “On the one hand” is followed by “Whereas on the other hand,” although the paragraphs present supporting reasons rather than contrasting views. “Furthermore” also does not clearly show how the next sentence relates to the previous one. The final example about food, water and energy ends without a concluding explanation, which weakens the paragraph’s flow. Use transitions that express the actual relationship between ideas, and connect each example back to the paragraph’s main point.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of topic-related vocabulary, including “life expectancy,” “scientific research,” “renewable energy” and “global crises.” These choices make your main points clear, and examples such as “drought-resistant crops” and “desalination plants” show an attempt to use specific terms. However, some word choices and collocations are inaccurate or imprecise, including “primary target of science,” “removing illness” and “life threatening diseases.” Spelling errors such as “reasearch,” “imporve” and “enery” also reduce accuracy. Capitalisation is inconsistent, for example “Healthcare” and “Solve” mid-sentence. Aim for more natural academic phrasing and check spelling and word forms carefully; these improvements would make your vocabulary more precise without requiring unnecessarily complex words.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt both simple and more complex sentence forms, including clauses introduced by “because,” “which” and “although.” Most of the argument remains understandable, but some grammatical errors recur. For example, “science have many areas” needs subject–verb agreement, and “there are some disease” needs a plural noun. In “which can increase the life expectancy and improves daily quality of life,” the verbs do not follow a consistent structure. The sentence beginning “Millions of people still lack this basic requirements” also has a mismatch between the demonstrative and plural noun. Some punctuation and sentence boundaries need attention, particularly the comma before “but” in “in this era but, still.” Review agreement, plurals and parallel verb forms, then proofread punctuation to make your varied sentence structures more controlled.

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.