Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · 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 5.5)

Scientific developments are occurring at a great rate but some of them do not seem to be of help to people. In fact, sometimes scientific innovations are regretted by those who, invented them. This essay will argue that scince should never harm people but scientists should aim to further their undestanding as much as to improve's people lives.

One the one hand, there is a strong argument that the public good should be the top priority for scientists, they are the ones who have the potential to make discoveries and invent things that can change the world.Electricity, mordern medicine, telecommunications and the internet are just some of the scientific innovations that have change lives for the better.

On the other hand, sometimes scientist do reasearch just in the hope of adding to their knowledge.While theybshould make absolutely sure thatntheir experiments do no harm, they may not know untill they have finished how their findings will be used and whether they will improve people's lives.The scientist Noble invented dynamite to help with mining, not knowing that it would one day be used in weapons, and the scientist who discovered the life-saving drug pencillin did so quite by chance.

Ovweall, it seems that scince should improve the live of people and that ought to be one of its aims. However, knowledge and discovery are aims in themselves and are just as important for scientiests. Sometimes scientists do not know how their scientific breakthroughs will be used untill their work is done.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You address the question by arguing that science should improve lives while also pursuing knowledge for its own sake, and the examples of electricity, medicine, dynamite and penicillin are relevant. However, the position is not fully consistent: the introduction says science should “never harm people,” while the conclusion presents knowledge and discovery as equally important aims without clarifying how these priorities relate. Several points are asserted rather than explained, particularly how the examples support your view or what responsibility scientists have for later uses of discoveries. The response is also one word below the required minimum. Develop the reasoning behind each example and state your degree of agreement more precisely throughout.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, two contrasting body paragraphs signalled by “On the one hand” and “On the other hand,” and a conclusion beginning “Overall.” This makes the main line of argument easy to follow. However, the progression within paragraphs is sometimes abrupt: the list of innovations is not followed by explanation, and the examples of dynamite and penicillin are placed together without clearly showing how each supports the point. Some linking is mechanical, and the conclusion largely repeats the introduction rather than drawing the argument together. Improve cohesion by explaining the connection between each example and your claim, and use clearer referencing so readers can see which idea “they” refers to.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use relevant topic vocabulary, including “scientific innovations,” “discoveries,” “experiments,” “findings” and “breakthroughs,” and these choices help communicate the subject. There is some attempt at more specific language, such as “public good” and “life-saving drug.” However, spelling errors are noticeable and sometimes distract the reader: “scince,” “undestanding,” “mordern,” “reasearch” and “pencillin” should be corrected. Some phrasing is also imprecise or repetitive, including repeated uses of “scientific” and “improve people’s lives.” Build accuracy by proofreading spelling and choosing more precise collocations, for example, “advance scientific knowledge” or “benefit society,” where appropriate.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt both simple and complex sentence forms, including a contrastive structure in “While they … may not know until they have finished how their findings will be used.” This shows some range, and the overall meaning is generally recoverable. However, several sentences contain grammatical or punctuation problems. In “One the one hand, there is a strong argument …, they are the ones,” a comma joins two independent clauses; use a full stop or a suitable conjunction. “One the one hand” also needs the article “On.” In “the innovations … that have change lives,” the verb form should be “have changed,” and “scientist do research” needs plural agreement or a singular subject. Review sentence boundaries, articles and subject–verb agreement to make your complex sentences 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.