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)
These days some people seem to argue that scientist should also take those necessary steps to improve people's life. On the other hand, others are of the opinion that there are some other struggling and needed areas where science should look after to enhance them. However, I completely agree with the idea that scientist must have to aim and rethink to do keep better for people's. There are certain reasons of my opinion which i wish to highlight in this essay.
In the first place, it would be quite interesting to note that science has already been improved in various areas which made individual's and professional's life easier and smooth. One of them is due to technological innovation. Now doctor could be able to learn those advance machineries which are introduced by science. It assists them to save million of people's life by using upgraded innovations. One illustration for this is that these solutions were not possible before the introduction of new technologies and now easily accessible to find every diseases and solution.
Another major reason of this side of the topic seem to be that science has also enhanced and introduce various new key features in the transportation system. A car has digital meter where it show's all significant sign and precautions which were hardly available in the old generation transports. Now we could choose our destination in the digital car map and it assists us with all details such as, how far the destination is and how much time it take to get us there.
In conclusion, I am convinced to say that it is indeed a debatable issue which needs further analysis and discussion. However, in the light of above-discussed arguments and examples. I am quite safe to conclude that the advantages of science to work for improving people lives overweigh its disadvantages and far outweigh in many aspects.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 6.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.0
The student addresses the prompt by clearly stating a position agreeing with the statement that science should aim to improve people's lives. The essay develops some relevant ideas, such as technological innovations in medicine and advancements in transportation systems. However, the development of these ideas is somewhat limited and repetitive, tending to generalise rather than fully extend the arguments with precise examples. Phrases like 'one illustration for this is that these solutions were not possible before' remain vague. While all parts of the prompt are addressed, the depth of task response aligns best with Band 5.5 to 6.0, touching upon Band 6 descriptors for relevant ideas though lacking thorough, well-supported extension.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0
The essay displays a coherent overall arrangement with a clear introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Paragraphing is utilised appropriately to separate main points. However, cohesion is frequently faulty or mechanical. For instance, transitional phrases like 'In the first place' and 'Another major reason of this side of the topic seem to be' are awkward, and referencing is occasionally unclear (e.g., 'of this side of the topic'). The logical progression is somewhat hindered by repetitive phrasing and clunky connective tissue. These features firmly place the response within the Band 5.0 to 5.5 range, meeting Band 5 descriptors where organisation is present but cohesion is mechanical and repetitive.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The student demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, attempting less common words and phrases such as 'technological innovation', 'transportation system', and 'debatable issue'. However, there are noticeable lexical errors and awkward collocations throughout the text, such as 'struggling and needed areas', 'do keep better for people's', 'advance machineries', and 'every diseases'. Word choice inaccuracies occasionally cause slight strain for the reader, though communication remains generally clear. These characteristics correspond closely to the Band 5 descriptors for Lexical Resource, reflecting a limited but minimally adequate range with persistent errors.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0
The writer attempts a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, demonstrating some ambition with structures like 'Now doctor could be able to learn those advance machineries which are introduced by science.' However, grammatical accuracy is weak, featuring frequent errors such as subject-verb agreement issues ('scientist should also take', 'scientist must have to aim', 'it show's'), incorrect modal/verb combinations ('Now doctor could be able to'), and article misuse ('find every diseases'). Punctuation errors are also present, such as sentence fragments in the conclusion ('However, in the light of above-discussed arguments and examples. I am quite safe...'). This frequent error rate places the grammar score at Band 5.0.
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.