Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-09-18
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 5.0)
In this contemproary era, Science has done numerous advancements in the recent years. the imperative aim of science should not only aim to improve individuals life but also thinks about the environment in which they live.I partially accord with this notion, and my point of view will be highlighted in the conclusion.
Commencing with the most salient reason, that why science ought to work for people life to make it easier. Initially, the with the technology advancements such as mobile phones makes easier for whole universe to contact with each other, at any time with just the internet. Moreover, the first light bulb is invented by the sicentist, by which the individuals may able to read and write even i the night with these bulbs. For instance, The electricity was introduced by the well renowed scientists a hundred years ago , which able people to use plethora of technology equipments such as machines, fan and many more nowadays,which improves the quality of humans life and make easier to live comfortably without and problem.
On the other hand, the same importance must be given to environment, in which they are living instead of focusing on individuals life. as these technology improvents has made people life easier, but it damage the whole ecosystem, as these equipments released toxic gases into atmosphere and depleting the whole environment. For Instance, The technogies must be designed in way, that they do not harm to environment, as the air conditioners should release less harmful gas inthe environment, since the global warming would be reduced and easy to live for whole creatures in the planet. Furthermore, The scientists must develop the devices which reduces the pollution present in the atmosphere.
In conclusion, According to my point of view, The science must focus on improving the life of humans and also save the environment and other creature on the planet, Reduce the carbon emissions in the atmosphere, hence the temeperature of the earth remained stable.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.0 |
Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5
The response addresses the prompt by discussing whether science should primarily improve human lives or also protect the environment. The writer takes a clear position, stating 'I partially accord with this notion,' and presents supporting ideas regarding technological advancements and environmental damage. However, the development of ideas tends to be repetitive and somewhat simplistic. For example, the arguments regarding the light bulb and electricity are combined into a slightly disjointed point, and the environmental discussion reiterates similar points about reducing emissions without fully extending the argument. Despite these limitations in depth, all parts of the prompt are addressed, aligning the response with Band 6.
Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.0
The essay displays a coherent overall arrangement with a clear attempt at paragraphing, separating the introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. Progression is visible, moving from human benefits to environmental concerns. However, cohesion is frequently faulty and mechanical. There are issues with transitional phrases, such as 'Commencing with the most salient reason, that why science ought to work for people life to make it easier,' which is ungrammatical and awkward. Referencing is also occasionally unclear, such as shifting pronouns confusingly. Paragraphing is present, but internal cohesion within paragraphs suffers from run-on sentences and punctuation errors, placing this criterion at Band 5.
Lexical Resource — Band 5.0
The writer demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, attempting some less common items such as 'contemproary,' 'plethora,' 'ecosystem,' and 'carbon emissions.' However, there are numerous spelling errors ('contemproary,' 'sicentist,' 'renowed,' 'equipments,' 'improvents') and instances of poor word choice or collocation, such as 'technology equipments' instead of 'technological equipment' and 'toxic gases into atmosphere.' While these errors are noticeable and detract from the precision of the text, they do not entirely impede communication, which is characteristic of a Band 5 performance.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.0
The response contains a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, but grammatical control is weak. There are frequent errors in basic sentence structure, subject-verb agreement, and articles. Examples include 'Science has done numerous advancements,' 'the imperative aim of science should not only aim to improve individuals life but also thinks,' and 'as the air conditioners should release less harmful gas inthe environment.' Punctuation is also problematic, with missing spaces after commas and periods, and comma splices. Because errors are frequent and often cause some difficulty for the reader, the writing sits comfortably within the Band 5 descriptor.
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.