Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-09-16

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)

There is no doubt about the fact that, science should be to improve people's lives. I totally agree with this statement because it makes job easy, saves time, saves lives.

Firstly, innovations in science can make job easy with tools. For example,if we need to do digging mannually it might takes forever but exavator can finish the job much easily. Another example, I work in construction field and the elevators are not ready in many sites so if we need to take tools up telehandler make our job easy. Science should be mostly focused on improving people's lives because people life is good then they can easily take care of all the other things around them. But if people are suffering they should only be focused on themselves only.

Secondly, It saves time. Travelling is one of the major example. If we need to commute to long distance there are lot of commuting vehicles. We can choose out transportaion according to out demand. Along with that, It should also aim to make people's life easy in medical sector. To support my ideas more clearly, there should more advance tools that can just help the patient to get rid of pain or any other problems that are facing. Moreover, there are some machines that help doctors to scan the body and find out the deciese and to cure them promptly.

To cut the story short, the above discssed task shoes that the science's main aim should be improving lives of people.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 6.0

The response addresses the prompt by taking a clear position that science should aim to improve people's lives. The student provides relevant ideas and some support, such as mentioning construction tools like excavators and telehandlers, as well as medical devices. However, the development of ideas remains somewhat limited and repetitive, particularly in the first body paragraph where the point about making jobs easier is reiterated without significant extension. The conclusion is also very brief. Consequently, the response aligns best with Band 6, as it addresses all parts of the task with relevant ideas, but some points are under-developed.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 6.0

The essay displays a coherent overall arrangement with basic paragraphing and clear introductory and concluding signals ('Firstly', 'Secondly', 'To cut the story short'). However, the logical progression is at times hindered by repetitive phrasing and weak transitional sentences. Referencing is occasionally unclear, such as 'the above discssed task shoes that...', which contains typographical and grammatical awkwardness. Cohesive devices are used mechanically rather than flexibly. Paragraphing is present and separates the introduction, body points, and conclusion adequately. This performance fits the Band 6 descriptor well, showing an overall coherent arrangement despite some faulty or mechanical cohesion.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.0

The student demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, successfully using terms related to daily life, construction, and medicine, such as 'innovations', 'transportation', and 'medical sector'. However, there are numerous spelling and word choice errors throughout the text, including 'mannually' instead of manually, 'exavator' instead of excavator, 'deciese' instead of disease, and 'shoes' instead of shows. Less common vocabulary is attempted with noticeable inaccuracy. While these errors do not severely impede communication, they restrict the lexical score to Band 5.0, reflecting a limited yet minimally adequate range with noticeable errors.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0

The writer uses a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, attempting conditionals and relative clauses (e.g., 'if we need to do digging mannually it might takes forever'). However, there are frequent grammatical errors, such as subject-verb agreement issues ('it might takes'), missing articles, and punctuation errors. Punctuation around transitional phrases is occasionally lacking. Despite these errors, meaning is generally conveyed without major difficulty, placing the grammar performance securely at Band 5.0 due to frequent errors and faulty attempts at complex structures.

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.