Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-09-12

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 5.5)

The most crucial target of science should be enhance individuals lives. I largly agree with the given notion to a large extent. The narrative ahead shall rticulate reasons of my belief along with the contradictory aspect before arriving at a rational conclusion.

To begin with the primary reason to support my argument, science has improved individuals lives in many ways such as in the medical sector. This is because, once before the medical treatment was less effective and also medicine do not work properly, so many of patient die without proper treatment. As a result, after improvement in the science saves many of lives and gives proper cure. To cite an example, many of babies are saved with new technical machinery and give them proper treatment from a disease

Furthermore, science also developed in a space and in a technical world. To elaborate more, many of space agencies and scientists got their intrest in the galaxy, stars and other planets, and developed many of rovers, spaceships and other piece of equipment. Hence, the intrest and development leads to a new findings. For instance, many of things are founds on mars and other planes by NASA in a last decade.

In contrast, technology also affects in various ways such as E-waste and radio active waste. This is because, more developments lead to more replacement and an equipment after backup is being derelict.Thus, those machines are spread amount of radiation and E-waste

To sum up, although development in science spread E-waste and radiation aftre replacement. I believe that newly enhanced science improve individuals lives in a medical sector and also new research findings in outside of the earth.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.0

The response addresses all parts of the task and presents a clear position throughout. The writer agrees that the main aim of science should be improving lives and supports this with arguments regarding medical advancements and space exploration, alongside a counter-argument concerning environmental drawbacks like E-waste. However, some ideas are under-developed and lack sufficient extension. For example, the medical point relies on repetitive phrasing ('many of patient die', 'saves many of lives') rather than fully articulated examples or deeper reasoning. The space exploration paragraph touches upon a relevant idea—that scientific curiosity also drives progress—but the link back to improving people's lives is somewhat tenuous. Overall, the response meets the criteria for Band 6 by addressing the prompt with relevant ideas, though development remains somewhat limited in places.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.0

The essay displays a coherent overall arrangement with a clear introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. The writer attempts to signal progression using standard cohesive devices such as 'To begin with', 'Furthermore', 'In contrast', and 'To sum up'. However, paragraphing and referencing are sometimes faulty or mechanical. For instance, the introductory sentences are disjointed ('The narrative ahead shall rticulate reasons...'), and referencing within sentences occasionally breaks down, such as 'an equipment after backup is being derelict.' Paragraphing is used to separate the different facets of the argument, but the internal flow of ideas is occasionally hindered by abrupt transitions and awkward phrasing. This performance aligns well with the Band 5.5 to 6.0 descriptors, comfortably securing a Band 6.0 for logical progression despite mechanical cohesion.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.0

The student demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, attempting some less common items such as 'crucial target', 'derelict', and 'radio active waste'. However, there are noticeable spelling and word-choice errors that detract from the overall quality. Examples include 'largly' instead of 'largely', 'rticulate' instead of 'articulate', 'intrest' instead of 'interest', 'founds' instead of 'found', 'planes' instead of 'planets', and 'aftre' instead of 'after'. Collocations are also occasionally unnatural, such as 'spread amount of radiation'. While these errors do not severely impede communication because the overall meaning remains clear, they restrict the lexical score to Band 5.0, as the frequency of spelling and morphological errors prevents it from reaching a solid Band 6.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0

The writer attempts a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, incorporating relative clauses and conditional structures. However, grammatical accuracy is weak, with frequent errors in verb tense, subject-verb agreement, and article usage. Examples include 'science has improved individuals lives' (missing apostrophe), 'once before the medical treatment was less effective and also medicine do not work properly' (tense inconsistency and pluralisation error), and 'many of babies are saved with new technical machinery and give them proper treatment' (faulty coordination and passive voice construction). Punctuation errors are also present, such as missing terminal punctuation and spacing issues. Because these errors occur frequently and occasionally cause the reader some difficulty, the response fits best into the Band 5 category for grammatical accuracy.

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.