Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-09-25
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)
Technology and science has been changed significantly as of the past. Numerous of machine inventions, explorations of universe has become possible due to science behind them. Science has evolved dramatically coming up to 21st century. Most of people ought to believe that science primary goals should be to improve people livelihood, rather than the inventions of nuclear bomb and weapons.
Particularly I believe that science should be used to improve the individuals daily life by introducing new technologies considering surrounding's environment. It can be started by educating the students and adult about the positive aspect, primarily focussing on health, and their consequences. In this busy life, many people don't consider health and do the activities such as consuming junk food, taking harmful substance and many more. By educating them properly, they can have positive attitude towards their lives.
Mostly nowadays after health, the contribution of science toward information sector should need significant change. In most of case, science do not reveal certain information related to its own technology progress. Information should be made public so that people can live stress relief free. For example: invention of wireless power by Nikola Tesla. It was his financer who didn't withdrew funding having its positive impact which could have turned worlds electricity transmission wireless. People must be beniffited from new technologies rather than discarding them. Science also should not focus on making nuclear bombs or harmful medicine, rather it should invest it for welfare of people.
To sum up, the development of science sector should be widely recognized by each country country for the better life of its citizens. Other than that, problem of violence using technology should not be faced by innocent souls.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 5.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5
The response addresses the prompt by discussing whether science should primarily focus on improving people's lives rather than developing weapons. The writer presents a clear position ('Particularly I believe that science should be used to improve the individuals daily life'), and attempts to support this with ideas around health education and information transparency. However, some ideas are under-developed or veer into tangential points, such as the anecdote about Nikola Tesla, which lacks clear integration with the core thesis. There is also a tendency to over-generalize and some points remain slightly vague. According to the Band 6 descriptors, the writer addresses all parts of the task though some ideas are under-developed or unclear, which accurately reflects this performance.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5
The essay displays a coherent overall arrangement with a discernible introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Paragraphing is used to separate distinct ideas, such as health education in the second paragraph and information sharing in the third. However, cohesion is sometimes faulty or mechanical. For instance, transitional phrases like 'Mostly nowadays after health' are awkward and unnatural. Referencing is also occasionally unclear, such as 'It can be started by educating the students and adult', where pronoun and subject reference lacks precision. Overall, the logical progression is present but hindered by clumsy cohesive ties, aligning well with the Band 6 descriptors.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.0
The student attempts an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, incorporating terms such as 'significantly', 'exploration', and 'welfare'. However, there are frequent inappropriate word choices and collocations, such as 'Technology and science has been changed', 'Numerous of machine inventions', and 'stress relief free'. Spelling and word-formation errors are also noticeable, including 'beniffited'. While the vocabulary is sufficient to convey the general message, these persistent inaccuracies and awkward phrasings limit the lexical score to a Band 5.5, fitting between the limitations of Band 5 and the more adequate control of Band 6.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0
The writer attempts a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, but control over grammar is inconsistent. There are frequent grammatical errors throughout the text, such as subject-verb agreement issues ('Technology and science has been changed', 'science do not reveal'), missing articles ('inventions of nuclear bomb'), and awkward prepositions. Many complex structures contain errors that can occasionally cause difficulty or hesitation for the reader, though they do not entirely impede overall communication. These features are characteristic of Band 5, where a limited range of structures and frequent errors are observed.
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.